Air Traffic Control
FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of Controller Attrition Gao ID: GAO-02-591 June 14, 2002Thousands of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) controllers will soon be eligible to retire because of extensive hiring in the 1980's to replace striking air traffic controllers. Although the exact number and timing of the controllers' departures has not been determined, attrition scenarios developed by both FAA and GAO indicate that the total attrition will grow substantially in both the short and long term. As a result, FAA will likely need to hire thousands of air traffic controllers in the next decade to met increasing traffic demands and to address the anticipated attrition of experienced controllers, predominately because of retirement. FAA has yet to developed a comprehensive human capital workforce strategy to address its impending controller needs. Rather, FAA's strategy for replacing controllers is generally to hire new controllers only when current, experienced controllers leave. This does not take into account the potential increases in future hiring and the time necessary to train replacements. In addition, there is uncertainty about the ability of FAA's new aptitude test to identify the best controller candidates. Further, FAA has not addressed the resources that may be needed at its training academy. Finally, exemptions to the age-56 separation rules raise safety and equity issues.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-02-591, Air Traffic Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of Controller Attrition
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-02-591
entitled 'Air Traffic Control: FAA Needs to Better Prepare for
Impending Wave of Controller Attrition' which was released on June 18,
2002.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products‘ accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
Report to the Chairman and Ranking Democratic Member of the
Subcommittee on Aviation, House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure:
June 2002:
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL:
FAA Needs to Better Prepare for Impending Wave of Controller Attrition:
GAO-02-591:
Comments:
Letter:
Executive Summary:
Purpose:
Background:
Results in Brief:
Principal Findings:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and GAO‘s Evaluation:
Chapter 1: Introduction:
Air Traffic Controllers‘ Responsibilities Vary by Facility and
Position:
Staffing Levels Negotiated between FAA and Controllers‘ Union:
Special Requirements Affect the Hiring and Retirement of Air Traffic
Controllers:
FAA Relies on a Variety of Sources for Air Traffic Controller
Candidates:
Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Chapter 2: FAA Is Facing Increased Controller Hiring because of
Higher Staffing Levels and Growing Attrition:
FAA Estimates It Will Need to Increase Controller Staffing Levels and
Will Increasingly Lose Many Controller Specialists:
GAO‘s Analysis Indicates that Sizable Controller Attrition Is
Likely:
Chapter 3: FAA Needs a More Comprehensive Workforce Plan for Air
Traffic Controllers:
FAA‘s Hiring Process Does Not Adequately Ensure that Qualified
Controllers Will Be Available When Necessary:
FAA Developed Screening Test to Help Identify Potential Candidates Most
Likely to Succeed:
Challenges Exist in Addressing Academy and On-the-Job Training
Resources and Equipment Needs:
Exemptions to the Age 56 Separation Provision Raise Safety and Equity
Concerns:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and GAO‘s Evaluation:
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Potential Impacts of Propsed Changes to Increase Air
Traffic Control Annuity Calculations:
Proposed Bill Would Increase Annuities:
Proposed Bill Would Create Financial Impacts:
Appendix II: Air Traffic Controller Schools:
Appendix III: Retirement Eligibility Methodology and Analysis:
Appendix IV: Methodology for Computer Simulation:
Analysis of Separation Trends:
Estimation Methodology of Future FAA Controller Separations:
Limitations:
Appendix V: Methodology for GAO‘s Survey of Air Traffic Controllers‘
Retirement and Attrition Plans:
Study Population:
Sample Design:
Survey Development:
Survey Administration:
Estimates:
Sampling Error:
Nonsampling Error:
Appendix VI: GAO Survey of Air Traffic Controllers:
Appendix VII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgements:
GAO Contacts:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Numbers and Types of Air Traffic Controllers:
Table 2: Retirement Eligibility Requirements for Controllers:
Table 3: FAA‘s Controller Specialist Staffing Needs through 2010, by
Fiscal Year:
Table 4: FAA‘s 10-year Estimate of Controller Specialist Losses, by
Fiscal Year:
Table 5: Sources of New Controllers, Fiscal Years 1997-2001:
Table 6: Current and Proposed Annuity Calculations:
Table 7: Retirement Annuity Calculations under Current CSRS and S. 871:
Table 8: Current Capacities of Air Traffic Controller Schools, as of
November 2001:
Table 9: Survey Sample Size and Disposition:
Figures:
Figure 1: Air Traffic Control System:
Figure 2: Regional Controller Specialist Allocations, Fiscal Year 2001:
Figure 3: Air Traffic Controllers Becoming Eligible for Retirement in
Each Fiscal Year:
Figure 4: Past and Simulated Air Traffic Controller Attrition, by
Fiscal
Year:
Figure 5: Survey Estimates: Past and Estimated Air Traffic Controller
Attrition:
Figure 6: Past and Projected Retirement Eligibility for Supervisory Air
Traffic Controllers:
Figure 7: Survey Estimates: Past and Estimated Air Traffic Controller
Attrition for Supervisory Air Traffic Controllers:
Figure 8: Controllers Becoming Eligible for Retirement by Fiscal Year
for En Route Centers, Ten Busiest Towers, and Ten Busiest TRACONs:
Figure 9: Locations of Air Traffic Controller Schools:
Abbreviations:
ATCS: Air Traffic Control Specialists:
CPMIS: Consolidated Personnel Management Information System:
CSRS: Civil Service Retirement System:
DOD: Department of Defense:
DOT: Department of Transportation:
FAA: Federal Aviation Administration:
FERS: Federal Employee Retirement System:
GAO: General Accounting Office:
NATCA: National Air Traffic Controllers Association:
TRACON: Terminal Radar Approach Control:
OPM: Office of Personnel Management:
Letter:
June 14, 2002:
The Honorable John L. Mica
Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
House of Representatives:
The Honorable William O. Lipinski
Ranking Democratic Member, Subcommittee on Aviation
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
House of Representatives:
In response to your request, this report identifies potential scenarios
for future air traffic controller attrition and FAA‘s plans for dealing
with such attrition. This report contains recommendations to the
Secretary of Transportation.
Unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no further
distribution of this report until 30 days from the date of this letter.
At that time, we will send copies to interested congressional
committees; the Secretary of Transportation; the Administrator, Federal
Aviation Administration; the Secretary of the Air Force; the Secretary
of the Army; the Secretary of the Navy; the Director, Office of
Management and Budget; and the Director, Office of Personnel
Management. We will also make copies available to others upon request.
Please call me at (202) 512-3650 if you or your staff have any
questions concerning this report. Major contributors to this report are
listed in appendix VII.
Signed by:
Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D.
Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues:
[End of section]
Executive Summary:
Purpose:
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for managing
the nation‘s air transportation system so that the 200,000 aircraft
taking off and landing each day can safely and efficiently carry more
than 700 million passengers per year. Because of the significant hiring
in the early 1980s to replace strikers who had been fired, many
thousands of FAA‘s controllers will soon become eligible to retire,
potentially leaving FAA with too few fully trained controllers.
Because of these concerns, the chairman and ranking democratic member
of the Subcommittee on Aviation, House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, asked GAO to (1) identify likely future attrition
scenarios for FAA‘s controller workforce and (2) examine FAA‘s strategy
for responding to its short-and long-term staffing needs, including how
it plans to address the challenges it may face.
To identify likely future attrition scenarios, we (1) reviewed FAA‘s
10-year hiring plan and associated attrition forecasts for
approximately 15,000 controller specialists who actively control and
separate traffic in the air and on the ground; (2) analyzed FAA‘s
workforce database to determine when the current controllers (those at
FAA as of June 30, 2001) would become eligible to retire; (3) developed
a computer model to predict future attrition based on historic levels;
and (4) developed and administered a survey to a statistically
representative sample of controllers so as to obtain information on
when they might leave FAA.[Footnote 1] GAO‘s analysis covers over
20,000 controllers--the 15,000 controller specialists whom FAA
analyzed, plus about 5,000 controllers who supervise and manage the air
traffic control system. GAO included the additional personnel because
attrition from these positions is generally filled from the controller
specialist ranks and, thus, omitting them would understate potential
attrition among all controllers. In addition, among other things, we
contacted all FAA regional offices, the 14 colleges or universities
that have controller training programs, and the branches of the
military so as to identify and discuss various aspects of workforce
planning for air traffic controllers.
Background:
In 1981, thousands of air traffic controllers who participated in a
nationwide strike were fired and barred by a presidential directive
from reemployment with FAA as air traffic controllers. As a result of
the strike, FAA was forced to hire, over a 3 to 4 year period,
thousands of new air traffic controllers and to rebuild its controller
workforce.
FAA currently employs over 20,000 employees who manage the air traffic
control system. Most of these (about 15,000) are air traffic control
specialists who are responsible for controlling the take-off, landing,
and ground movement of planes. In addition, there are traffic
management coordinators (about 670), who control the flow of air
traffic; front-line supervisors (about 1,900), who work in various
facilities around the country; and managers or staff (about 2,370), who
oversee and administer the air traffic control program. Under a 1998
collective bargaining agreement with the National Air Traffic
Controllers Association (NATCA), the union that represents the air
traffic control specialists, controller specialist staffing levels were
set at 15,000 for fiscal years 1999 through 2001 and are authorized to
grow to 15,606 controllers by the end of fiscal year 2003.
FAA hires new air traffic controller candidates from several different
sources. Most candidates with no prior experience come from one of 14
post-secondary educational institutions that train new controllers for
FAA. Once hired by FAA, most of these candidates attend a 12-week
training program at FAA‘s academy in Oklahoma City and receive an
average of 2 to 4 years of on-the-job training at field facilities to
become certified professional controllers. Most candidates with prior
experience come from either the Department of Defense or the pool of
fired controllers who were allowed to return to FAA beginning in 1993.
Air traffic controllers are covered under either the Civil Service
Retirement System (CSRS) or the Federal Employee Retirement System
(FERS), depending upon when they were hired by FAA. Under either
retirement program, controllers are subject to special requirements
that allow them to retire at an earlier age and with fewer years of
service than most federal employees. In addition, Congress directed
that air traffic controllers are subject to mandatory separation from
controlling live air traffic at age 56 because of safety concerns, but
there are exemptions to this requirement.[Footnote 2]
Results in Brief:
Although the exact number and timing of the controllers‘ departures is
impossible to determine, attrition scenarios developed by both FAA and
GAO indicate that the total attrition will grow substantially in the
short and long terms. As a result, FAA will likely need to hire
thousands of air traffic controllers in the next decade to meet
increasing traffic demands and to address the anticipated attrition of
experienced controllers, predominately because of retirement. For
example, the results of GAO‘s survey of controllers indicate that
approximately 5,000 controllers may leave in the next 5 years, a figure
that is more than two times higher than that for the past 5 years. GAO
also found that the potential for retirement among frontline
supervisors and controllers at some of FAA‘s busiest facilities is
high.
FAA has not developed a comprehensive human capital workforce strategy
to address its impending controller needs. Rather, FAA‘s strategy for
replacing controllers is generally to hire new controllers only when
current, experienced controllers leave. GAO‘s review identified
challenges that FAA will face in trying to ensure that well-qualified
new controllers are available when needed. For example, FAA‘s hiring
process does not adequately take into account the potential increases
in future hiring and the time necessary to fully train replacements. In
addition, there is uncertainty about the ability of FAA‘s new aptitude
test to identify the best controller candidates. Further, FAA has not
addressed the resources that may be needed at its training academy and
for providing on-the-job training at its control facilities in order to
handle the large influx of new controllers and to ensure that FAA‘s
controller workforce will continue to have the knowledge, skills, and
abilities necessary to perform its critical mission. Finally,
exemptions to the age-56 separation rules raise safety and equity
issues that FAA has not assessed.
GAO recently published a model of human capital management that
highlights the critical success factors FAA can use to manage its human
capital more strategically to accomplish its mission.[Footnote 3] Along
these lines, GAO makes recommendations intended to help FAA meet its
impending need to hire and train thousands of air traffic controllers.
In commenting on a draft of this report, senior FAA officials indicated
that the report was generally accurate. The officials also commented
that they would look at GAO‘s human capital management model to
determine its applicability to air traffic controller specialist
staffing, and that FAA would consider GAO‘s recommendations in its
planning.
Principal Findings:
FAA Will Likely Be Faced with Hiring Increasing Numbers of Controllers:
FAA will likely need to hire increasing numbers of controllers over the
next decade to meet increasing traffic demands and to address the
anticipated attrition of experienced controllers. FAA estimates that by
2010, it will need about 2,000 more controllers than are presently
employed to handle future increases in air traffic. In addition, many
air traffic controllers currently employed by FAA will likely leave
their positions within the next decade. FAA estimates that by 2010,
about 7,000 controller specialists, nearly 50 percent of those
currently employed, will leave. The largest part of this exodus will
come from retirements, with FAA estimating that it will experience
retirements of controller specialists at a level three times higher
than that experienced over the 5-year period from 1996 through 2000.
GAO analyzed aspects of FAA‘s controller workforce in addition to
controller specialists and found that even more controllers might soon
leave their current positions than FAA estimates. For example, GAO‘s
analysis of personnel data for over 20,000 of FAA‘s controllers shows a
scenario where about 2,500 of FAA‘s current controllers were eligible
to retire as of September 30, 2001, and nearly 14,000 controllers (or
70 percent of the current controllers) will become eligible to retire
by the end of fiscal year 2011. In addition, GAO‘s model for potential
controller attrition indicates that, on average, about 600 to 800
controllers will leave FAA employment, primarily though retirement, in
each of the next 10 years. Further, results from GAO‘s survey of air
traffic controllers indicated that many controllers are currently
planning on leaving (predominately because of retirement) in the near
future. Of the approximately 20,000 controllers now working at FAA, GAO
estimates on the basis of its survey that approximately 5,000
controllers plan to leave by the end of fiscal year 2006.[Footnote 4]
This includes an estimated 51 percent of the controllers who plan to
retire when they first become eligible to do so. Many potential
retirees currently hold key positions as supervisors, work in some of
FAA‘s busiest facilities, or both. GAO found that about 93 percent of
current supervisors will reach retirement eligibility by the end of
fiscal year 2011. In addition, by the end of that year, FAA‘s busiest
centers will potentially face a significant turnover in their current
controller workforce, as about 65 percent of current controllers in en
route centers become eligible to retire by the end of fiscal year 2011.
A Comprehensive Workforce Strategy Could Better Prepare FAA for
Upcoming Controller Attrition:
An effective human capital process anticipates expected attrition and
includes the development of a comprehensive workforce plan that (1)
establishes an effective approach for hiring individuals with the
requisite skills and abilities in time to accomplish agency missions;
(2) provides new employees with the best training opportunities
possible to maximize their potential; and (3) uses opportunities to
retain qualified staff. FAA has not developed such a comprehensive
workforce strategy to address all of the challenges it faces in
responding to its impending need for thousands of new air traffic
controllers, thus increasing the risk that FAA will not have enough
qualified controllers when necessary to meet air traffic demands. GAO
identified several challenges in FAA‘s approach to hiring, recruiting,
and training new candidates and to retaining existing ones, and these
are not fully addressed in FAA‘s plans. For example, FAA‘s process of
generally hiring replacements only after a current controller leaves
does not adequately take into consideration the time it takes to train
a replacement to become a fully certified controller--up to 5 years,
which might result in gaps of coverage or increased overtime. In
addition, FAA‘s proposal to rely more heavily on candidates who have no
previous experience (so-called off-the-street hires) may result in
additional challenges. Because it takes a certain type of person to
become an effective controller and FAA has experienced failure rates at
its training academy of as high as 50 percent, FAA developed a
screening test to help select better potential candidates. However,
recent changes have been made to the screening test to allow additional
candidates to pass it. As a result, the effectiveness of the screening
test in identifying successful candidates has yet to be determined. FAA
plans to implement the revised exam in June 2002 and, if funding is
available, plans to evaluate the success of the exam in identifying
successful candidates. A further challenge exists at FAA‘s training
academy, where staff have identified equipment and personnel
requirements that will need to be addressed to effectively handle the
expected influx of new candidates. Finally, with the rehiring of
controllers who went on strike in 1981, FAA is faced with having
increasing numbers of employees controlling air traffic who are past
age 56--most of the 733 rehired controllers are exempt from this
mandatory separation age. FAA has not assessed the potential safety and
equity issues associated with exempting these or other controllers from
the mandatory separation age.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To better respond to the challenges presented by the need to hire
thousands of new controller candidates, GAO recommends that the
secretary of transportation direct the administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration to develop a comprehensive workforce plan that
includes strategies for (1) identifying the timing of hiring necessary
to ensure that facilities have appropriate numbers of certified
controllers available to provide adequate coverage; (2) evaluating the
newly developed screening test to determine whether it is identifying
the most successful candidates; (3) addressing the capacity challenges
associated with the training academy and on-the-job training programs;
and (4) assessing the potential safety and equity issues associated
with exempting potentially large numbers of controllers from the
mandatory separation age requirement.
Agency Comments and GAO‘s Evaluation:
We provided FAA with a draft of this report for its review and comment.
Senior FAA officials found that the report was generally accurate and
indicated that they would consider GAO‘s recommendations in its
workforce planning.
Overall, FAA‘s comments stressed that FAA has a working human capital
workforce strategy model that has enabled the agency to meet its
staffing goals over the past few years. FAA officials agreed that the
potential for sizable future attrition, in the range of 600-800
controllers per year, is likely over the next decade. The officials
said, however, that although they have plans that extend to 2010, the
uncertainty surrounding the future, as well as labor contracts and
budget constraints, limit their specific workforce planning for air
traffic controllers to fiscal years 2002 through 2004. With general
agreement between FAA and GAO that attrition will grow substantially
over the next decade, GAO believes that the workforce challenges FAA
faces exist well beyond fiscal year 2004. As such, GAO believes that
sound workforce planning demands that FAA develop a strategic vision
that includes a workable, long-term plan to meet staffing needs.
Regarding GAO‘s concern about FAA‘s preparedness for the future, the
officials remarked that FAA‘s ability to meet its past goals is an
indication of its ability to meet future needs, and that there is
nothing to indicate that its successful performance will not continue
in the future. GAO recognizes that FAA has been able to meet its recent
staffing goals. However, the recent workforce climate for FAA could be
significantly different from that which it will face over the next
decade. The report highlights the workforce challenges, particularly
the sizable anticipated increases in controller attrition, that are
likely over the next decade, and identifies challenges in FAA‘s
planning that will make it difficult for FAA to maintain its past
performance. In particular, the report points out the potential skills
gap that FAA could face in the future because its current hiring
process does not ensure that fully qualified controllers are available
to replace experienced controllers when they leave.
The officials also commented that FAA has long planned for an
operational evaluation of the new screening exam. The officials
indicated that they are currently considering two options for
evaluating the effectiveness of the exam, and that they need to decide
on the appropriate option and develop an implementation and funding
plan. However, the officials noted that continued funding for the
ongoing research could not be assured. In response to this comment, GAO
revised the text of the report to recognize FAA‘s efforts and plans
regarding evaluation of the new screening exam, and modified its
recommendation to clarify that the evaluation is needed as part of a
comprehensive workforce plan.
In addition, the FAA officials provided technical comments that GAO
incorporated, as appropriate.
[End of section]
Chapter 1: Introduction:
The Federal Aviation Administration is responsible for managing the
national airspace system and ensuring the safe and efficient movement
of air traffic. In doing so, FAA controls the take-off and landing of
nearly 200,000 planes per day, which carry over 700 million passengers
per year. To accomplish this mission, FAA must have a sufficient number
of adequately trained air traffic controllers working at its air
traffic control facilities.
In 1981 over 11,000 air traffic controllers went on strike and were
subsequently fired by President Ronald Reagan. Between 1982 and 1990,
FAA hired thousands of individuals to permanently replace the fired
controllers. Most of this hiring took place between 1982 and 1986. Many
of these controllers, as well as those controllers who did not
participate in the strike, are now eligible or will soon be eligible to
retire from FAA.
Air Traffic Controllers‘ Responsibilities Vary by Facility and
Position:
Air traffic controllers play a critical role in the nation‘s air
transportation system by helping ensure the safe, orderly, and
expeditious flow of air traffic in the air and on the ground.
Controllers help ensure that aircraft maintain a safe distance between
one another and that each aircraft is on proper course to its
destination.
Specific controller responsibilities for managing air traffic vary
according to the type of air traffic control facility. For instance,
controllers who work at airport control towers are responsible for
ensuring the safe separation of aircraft on the ground and in flight in
the vicinity of airports, generally within a 5-mile radius. These
controllers manage the flow of aircraft during take-off and landing and
coordinate the transfer of aircraft with adjacent control facilities as
aircraft enter or leave an airport‘s airspace. Controllers working at
terminal radar approach control (TRACON) facilities use radar screens
to track planes and manage the arrival and departure of aircraft within
a 5-to 50-nautical mile radius of airports. At these TRACON facilities,
a key function of an approach controller is to line up and sequence
airplanes as they descend into an airport‘s 5-mile radius. Controllers
working at air route traffic control centers (commonly called en route
centers) manage aircraft beyond a 50-nautical mile radius. These
controllers assign aircraft to specific routes and altitudes while they
fly along federal airways. These controllers also coordinate the
transfer of aircraft control with adjacent en route or terminal
facilities.[Footnote 5] The typical en route center is responsible for
more than 100,000 square miles of airspace, which generally extends
over several states.
Figure 1 shows how controllers working at the different air traffic
control facilities track aircraft during ground movements, take-off,
in-flight, and landing operations. Currently, FAA operates 339 air
traffic control facilities, consisting of 24 en route centers and 315
terminal facilities.
Figure 1: Air Traffic Control System:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO presentation of FAA information.
[End of figure]
In total, about 20,000 employees categorized as air traffic controllers
directly control and manage the air traffic system, comprising several
positions with differing responsibilities.[Footnote 6] (See table 1.)
This total includes positions that actively control, or supervise the
control of, traffic (air traffic control specialists, traffic
management coordinators, and operational supervisors); and ’off-line“
positions that do not control traffic (former air traffic control
specialists in management, training, or staff positions).
Table 1: Numbers and Types of Air Traffic Controllers:
Air traffic control position: Air traffic controller specialists
(ATCS); Duties and responsibilities: Controls and manages the
separation of air traffic in designated airspace or on the ground at
airports.; Number of employees: 15,120.
Air traffic control position: Traffic management coordinators; Duties
and responsibilities: Controls the flow of air traffic by determining
how many planes should be in designated airspace at once. Can order
that planes be held on the ground and special routings.; Number of
employees: 670.
Air traffic control position: Operations supervisors (first-line);
Duties and responsibilities: Provides general supervision of the
controllers on duty, including monitoring and managing the flow of
traffic and distributing work among controllers.; Number of employees:
1,862.
Air traffic control position: Other (management, staff specialists, and
so forth); Duties and responsibilities: Provides support services such
as training, management, and administration in an air traffic control
facility.; Number of employees: 2,369.
Air traffic control position: Total; Duties and responsibilities:
[Empty]; Number of employees: 20,021.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of FAA‘s personnel database, as of June 30,
2001.
[End of table]
Staffing Levels Negotiated between FAA and Controllers‘ Union:
As the table above indicates, the majority of air traffic controllers
are classified as specialists. These controllers are represented by the
National Air Traffic Controllers Association, which negotiated staffing
levels with FAA in 1998. Under the terms of the agreement, nationwide
staffing (in full-time equivalents) for these specialists was set at
15,000 for fiscal years 1999 through 2001. The agreement also called
for 2 percent staff increases for fiscal years 2002 and 2003, arriving
at a controller specialist staffing level of 15,606 by the end of
fiscal year 2003. FAA has requested funding to meet the staffing levels
called for in the agreement. Under the 1998 agreement, FAA headquarters
officials and NATCA national representatives negotiate allocation of
staffing levels for the air traffic control specialists among FAA‘s
nine regions. Figure 2 below shows the location of each FAA region and
the number of controller specialists allocated to each region for
fiscal year 2001.
Figure 2: Regional Controller Specialist Allocations, Fiscal Year 2001:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO presentation of FAA data.
[End of figure]
Once the regions receive their staff allocations, FAA regional managers
and NATCA regional representatives negotiate staff allocations among
the various field facilities in each region. The additional 606
controllers called for under the 1998 agreement are to be distributed
to regions and field facilities in the same way, with FAA and NATCA
officials negotiating allocations to each region and specific facility.
Special Requirements Affect the Hiring and Retirement of Air Traffic
Controllers:
In 1972, Congress passed Public Law 92-297, which authorized the
secretary of transportation to set a maximum entry age for initial
appointments to air traffic controller positions at the FAA. Pursuant
to this authority, FAA requires that a potential controller candidate
be hired before reaching his or her 31ST birthday. This provision was
established in recognition of the fact that younger trainees are more
successful in completing the controller training programs, and that
younger individuals may be better able to deal with the stress of
controlling air traffic. One exception to this rule is the Employment
of Retired Military Air Traffic Controllers Program, commonly known as
the Phoenix Controller-20 program, under which FAA commits to hiring
retired military controllers who are past the age of 30. This exception
allows military controllers to stay with the military longer before
moving to FAA to continue their controller activities.
Controller retirement is also affected by special requirements.
Controllers working at FAA‘s air traffic control facilities and staff
offices are eligible to retire under two sets of retirement provisions:
the general retirement requirements for federal employees and special
requirements for controllers. Depending on when a controller was hired,
he or she is covered by either the Civil Service Retirement System or
the Federal Employee Retirement System. As federal employees,
controllers under these systems can retire if they meet certain age and
years-of-service requirements. For example, under general CSRS, a
controller who is 55 years old can retire after 30 years of federal
service, or at 60 years old with 20 years of service, or at 62 with 5
years of service.
Under the special controller retirement requirements, a controller may
retire earlier than under the general CSRS and FERS requirements if he
or she has enough service time as an active controller specialist,
traffic management coordinator, or immediate supervisor. Time in these
’covered“ positions is generally known as ’good time“ because it counts
toward the special retirement requirements. Controllers can retire at
age 50 if they have spent at least 20 years in a covered position, or
at any age if they have at least 25 years in a covered position. Under
these provisions, controllers covered by CSRS are guaranteed a
retirement annuity amounting to the greater of two figures: either 50
percent of their high average 3-year salary or the basic federal
retirement
annuity.[Footnote 7] Controllers covered by FERS receive an annuity
amounting to 1.7 percent of their high average 3-year salary for the
first 20 years of service plus 1 percent of their high average 3-year
salary for each additional year of service.
Table 2 summarizes the CSRS, FERS, and special retirement provisions.
Table 2: Retirement Eligibility Requirements for Controllers:
[See PDF for image]
[A] Basic retirement eligibility under FERS is subject to a minimum
retirement age that varies depending on the birth date of the employee.
Source: GAO presentation of Office of Personnel Management information.
[End of table]
In addition to these basic retirement eligibility requirements, air
traffic controllers covered by CSRS are also subject, pursuant to
Public Law 92-297, to a rule requiring mandatory separation at age 56.
Controllers covered by FERS are subject to a similar rule, pursuant to
Public Law 99-335. Under this requirement, with some exceptions,
controllers
actively working in covered positions must separate by the last day of
the month in which they turn 56.[Footnote 8]
FAA Relies on a Variety of Sources for Air Traffic Controller
Candidates:
FAA relies on a number of sources to fill its controller positions.
These sources are (1) individuals with no prior controller training or
work experience in the air traffic control environment, (2) individuals
with some controller training but generally no actual controller work
experience, and (3) individuals with prior controller work experience.
The first group includes individuals who respond to an Office of
Personnel Management vacancy announcement. Referred to as off-the-
street hires, these candidates must pass an OPM exam to qualify for
employment with FAA and must pass a 15-week initial training program at
FAA‘s Academy in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, before being assigned to a
facility.[Footnote 9] There have been no OPM job announcements for
entry-level air traffic control specialist positions since 1992,
because FAA has chosen to rely on other sources for new candidates. FAA
estimates that approximately 150 people who responded to the last
announcement and passed the OPM exam are still eligible for employment
as controllers.[Footnote 10]
The second group includes graduates of FAA-accredited collegiate
programs who receive initial air traffic control training prior to
being hired by FAA. This type of training introduces students to the
terminology, airspace configurations, and technical skills necessary to
manage air traffic and operate equipment. Students can receive general
air traffic control training at one of 13 schools under FAA‘s
collegiate training initiative program, or specialized en route
training at the Minneapolis Community and Technical College, formerly
known as the Mid-American Aviation Resource Consortium school (see app.
II for more detailed information on the schools). Collegiate training
initiative schools offer either two-or four-year aviation related
degrees. Unlike these schools, the Minneapolis Community and Technical
College program is not part of a broader academic program, and the
federal government subsidizes the cost of training its students.
Collegiate training initiative graduates must pass an initial 12-week
controller training program at the FAA academy to begin work at their
assigned facility, while Minneapolis Community and Technical College
graduates can immediately begin working at their assigned facilities.
During fiscal years 1997 through 2001, FAA has hired 465 from the
collegiate training programs and 291 from the Minneapolis Community and
Technical College.[Footnote 11]
The third group of candidates consists of controllers with previous air
traffic control experience, including both former Department of Defense
(DOD) controllers and controllers fired in the 1981 strike. DOD employs
both active-duty military controllers and civilian controllers. In
general, military controllers can leave DOD for FAA at the end of their
enlistments, as long as they do so before turning 31 years of
age.[Footnote 12] To help DOD minimize military controller losses, FAA
and DOD designed a program in 1999 called the Phoenix Controller-20
program to give controllers an incentive to stay in the military past
age 30. Under this program, military controllers can join FAA after
they retire from military service. FAA may also hire controllers who
previously held air traffic controller positions with the agency; most
of them are among those fired in the 1981 controller strike. President
Reagan banned the federal government from hiring any of these
controllers, but President Bill Clinton lifted this ban in 1993, at
which time FAA issued a job announcement for fired controllers
interested in returning to work. Candidates in this group are not
required to attend initial controller training at the academy but may
be required to take refresher training there. During fiscal years 1997
through 2001, FAA hired 793 former DOD controllers and rehired 562
controllers who had been fired in 1981.
Once assigned to an air traffic control facility, candidates are
classified as ’developmental controllers“ until they complete all
requirements to be certified for all of the air traffic control
positions within a defined area of a given facility. It generally takes
new controllers who have had only initial controller training between 2
and 4 years--depending on the facility and the availability of facility
staff or contractors to provide on-the-job training--to complete all
the certification requirements to become certified professional
controllers.[Footnote 13] It normally takes individuals who have prior
controller experience less time to become fully certified.
Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
In October 2000, the chairman and ranking democratic member of the
Subcommittee on Aviation, House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, asked us to examine FAA‘s efforts to address existing
and future controller staffing needs. We were asked to (1) identify
likely future attrition scenarios for FAA‘s controller workforce and
(2) examine FAA‘s strategy for responding to its short-and long-term
staffing needs, including how it plans to address the challenges it may
face.
To identify future attrition scenarios for FAA‘s controller workforce,
we (1) obtained and analyzed FAA estimates of future retirement and
attrition; (2) analyzed FAA‘s employee database to determine when
controllers would reach retirement eligibility; (3) developed a
computer model to simulate future attrition based on historic FAA air
traffic controller rates; and (4) developed and mailed a survey to a
sample of current air traffic controllers to determine their retirement
plans.
FAA‘s estimates: To obtain FAA‘s estimates of future retirements and
attrition, we interviewed officials in FAA‘s Office of Air Traffic
Resource Management who are responsible for managing the controller
workforce. These officials provided information on the data used to
support FAA‘s estimates of future controller attrition. They provided
estimates only for the 15,000 controller specialists; similar estimates
were not available for other categories of air traffic controllers.
Analysis of FAA‘s workforce: We used personnel data supplied by FAA to
calculate the age and service characteristics of 20,021 air traffic
controllers who were employed as of June 30, 2001, the most recent data
available at that time. These included 15,120 controller specialists,
670 traffic management coordinators, 1,862 operational supervisors, and
2,369 managers and staff specialists. We used this information to
determine the number of controllers reaching retirement eligibility
over the next decade. Additional information on how we made these
projections is contained in appendix III.
Simulation model of attrition: We developed a computer simulation that
projected the level of potential controller attrition through 2011.
This model used age and years of service information for the controller
workforce, in addition to past attrition rates and some assumptions
about future attrition rates, to estimate the number of future losses
FAA will face in its controller workforce. Additional information on
the methodology of the computer simulation, including the assumptions
we used, is given in appendix IV.
Survey of controllers: We mailed a survey to controllers to obtain
independent estimates of future controller attrition. After developing
and pre-testing the survey, we sent it to a statistically
representative sample of 2,100 current controllers. The survey asked
the controllers about when they planned to retire or leave the agency
and about factors that could affect their decision. We received
responses from over 75 percent of our sample. Additional information on
the survey methodology can be found in appendix V.
To address the second objective of examining FAA‘s strategy for
responding to its short-and long-term staffing needs, including how it
plans to address the challenges it may face, we obtained information on
the availability of potential controller candidates, FAA‘s process for
hiring new controller candidates, and FAA‘s training activities
associated with new candidates.
To obtain information on the availability of candidates, we interviewed
officials at FAA headquarters, the 9 FAA regional offices, the 14
college or university air traffic control programs, and the Department
of Defense to determine the number of controllers who are potentially
available to FAA. We visited schools in California, Minnesota, New
Hampshire, and Florida to better understand their activities. We did
not verify the information provided by these sources.
To understand FAA‘s process for hiring new controller candidates, we
interviewed officials at FAA‘s headquarters and regional offices. At
FAA‘s headquarters we focused on the activities of the Air Traffic
Resource Management office, which is responsible for monitoring air
traffic controller hiring levels. In addition, we met with officials at
FAA‘s Civil Aeronautical Medical Institute to discuss their activities
to develop a new screening test for potential controller candidates--
referred to as Air Traffic Selection and Training exam (AT-SAT). In
addition, we obtained information on how FAA uses staffing standards to
determine staffing levels at its various facilities and interviewed
officials with the National Academy of Sciences about their review of
FAA‘s staffing standards.
To obtain information on FAA‘s training activities, we visited FAA‘s
training academy in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and discussed on-the-job
training with each of FAA‘s nine regional offices.
We also interviewed officials with the Air Transport Association,
NATCA, and representatives of all nine FAA regional offices to ensure
that we obtained a nationwide perspective on controller staffing
issues. Finally, we obtained and reviewed information from the Office
of Personnel Management and our previous reports on good human capital
practices in government agencies to evaluate FAA‘s workforce plan
regarding air traffic controller staffing.
We conducted our review from January 2001 through April 2002, in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. We
obtained oral comments on a draft of this report from senior FAA
officials, which are discussed at the end of chapter 3.
[End of section]
Chapter 2: FAA Is Facing Increased Controller Hiring because of Higher
Staffing Levels and Growing Attrition:
[End of section]
Although the exact number and timing of the controllers‘ departure is
impossible to determine, attrition scenarios developed by both FAA and
GAO indicate that the total attrition will grow substantially in the
short and long terms. As a result, FAA will likely need to hire
thousands of air traffic controllers in the next decade to meet
increasing traffic demands and to address the anticipated attrition of
experienced controllers, predominately created by retirements.
Depending on the scenario, total attrition could range from 7,200 to
nearly 11,000 controllers over the next decade. GAO also found that the
potential for retirement among frontline supervisors and controllers at
some of FAA‘s busiest facilities may be high.
To identify likely future attrition scenarios, we (1) reviewed FAA‘s
10-year hiring plan and associated attrition forecasts for
approximately 15,000 controller specialists who actively control and
separate traffic in the air and on the ground; (2) analyzed FAA‘s
workforce database to determine when the current controllers (those at
FAA as of June 30, 2001) would become eligible to retire; (3) developed
a computer model to predict future attrition based on historic levels;
and (4) developed and administered a survey to a statistically
representative sample of controllers so as to obtain information on
when they might leave FAA.[Footnote 14] GAO‘s analysis covers more than
20,000 controllers--the 15,000 controller specialists whom FAA analyzed
and about 5,000 controllers who supervise and manage the air traffic
control system. GAO included the additional personnel because attrition
from these positions is generally filled from the controller specialist
ranks and, thus, omitting them would understate potential attrition
among all controllers.
FAA Estimates It Will Need to Increase Controller Staffing Levels and
Will Increasingly Lose Many Controller Specialists:
In May 2001 FAA prepared a 10-year estimate of its hiring needs that
included a projection of the number of controller specialists who may
be needed in the future and estimates of expected controller losses.
The estimate shows that the number of controller specialists needed to
help manage the air traffic system could grow from about 15,000 in
fiscal year 2001 to over 17,000 by the end of fiscal year 2010, and
that losses of controllers could increase from 428 in fiscal year 2001
to over 1,000 in 2010.
FAA Estimates It Will Need about 2,000 More Controller Specialists:
FAA estimates that future air traffic increases will require it to hire
more than 2,000 additional air traffic controllers over the next
decade. FAA bases its future projections on a mathematical model,
referred to as the staffing standard, which factors expected traffic
levels and the amount of tasks a typical controller can perform in a
given time frame in order to estimate the future number of controllers
that FAA will need. As shown in table 3, FAA anticipates a growing
requirement for controller specialists.
Table 3: FAA‘s Controller Specialist Staffing Needs through 2010, by
Fiscal Year:
Total controllers required; 2002: 15,300[ A]; 2003: 15,606[ A]; 2004:
15,906; 2005: 16,139; 2006: 16,363; 2007: 16,599; 2008: 16,836; 2009:
17,072; 2010: 17,309.
[A] Staffing levels for fiscal years 2002 and 2003 were negotiated
between FAA and NATCA.
Source: GAO‘s presentation of FAA data.
[End of table]
FAA‘s controller staffing levels in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 were
established under the terms of FAA‘s 1998 contract with NATCA, which
represents the controller specialists. To estimate staffing needs for
fiscal year 2004 and beyond, FAA used its air traffic control staffing
standards. The standards estimate that FAA will need, on average, about
245 additional controllers each year from the end of fiscal year 2003
though fiscal year 2010, mainly because of increases in air
traffic.[Footnote 15] The standards further estimate that FAA will need
17,309 controllers by fiscal year 2010--over 2,000 more controllers
than are currently employed.
The National Academy of Sciences examined FAA‘s staffing standards in
1997.[Footnote 16] It found that the standards did a reasonable job of
estimating future needs on a national or regional level, but that the
standards were not as useful in determining facility level needs. It
recommended that FAA modify its staffing process to produce more
reliable facility staffing estimates. To date, however, FAA has not
fully implemented this recommendation because of funding limitations,
according to the branch manager, Resource Management.
FAA Estimates that Future Controller Losses Will Grow:
FAA‘s projections show growing losses of controller specialists. FAA
included estimates of three types of losses: retirements,
nonretirements (for example, resignations, firings, and deaths), and
non-attrition (controllers who leave to take other positions within
FAA, such as supervisory and staff positions). According to the branch
manager, Resource Management, the forecast is based on historic
attrition levels. Table 4 displays FAA‘s 10-year projections.
Table 4: FAA‘s 10-year Estimate of Controller Specialist Losses, by
Fiscal Year:
ATCS retirement; 2001: 153; 2002: 202; 2003: 246; 2004: 294; 2005: 335;
2006: 423; 2007: 569; 2008: 620; 2009: 666; 2010: 719; Total: 4,227.
Non-retirement; 2001: 104; 2002: 106; 2003: 108; 2004: 110; 2005: 111;
2006: 113; 2007: 115; 2008: 116; 2009: 118; 2010: 119; Total: 1,120.
Non-attrition; 2001: 171; 2002: 174; 2003: 178; 2004: 181; 2005: 184;
2006: 187; 2007: 189; 2008: 192; 2009: 195; 2010: 197; Total: 1,848.
Total estimated losses; 2001: 428; 2002: 482; 2003: 532; 2004: 585;
2005: 630; 2006: 722; 2007: 873; 2008: 928; 2009: 978; 2010: 1,036;
Total: 7,195.
Source: GAO‘s presentation of FAA data.
[End of table]
As the table shows, FAA is estimating sizable increases in controller
specialist retirements over the next decade, with retirements
increasing each year and exceeding 700 by the end of fiscal year 2010.
The average annual retirement level over the length of the forecast
period is 423, which is three times higher than the average annual
retirement level of 141 that FAA experienced over the 5-year period of
1996 through 2000. Combined with other losses, this estimate
anticipates a nearly 50-percent turnover in the next decade from its
current controller specialist contingent of approximately 15,000.
GAO‘s Analysis Indicates that Sizable Controller Attrition Is Likely:
The scenarios shown by our analysis of retirement eligibility trends,
the results of our simulation model, and estimates from our controller
survey all indicate that FAA may face a sizable increase in future
attrition, primarily because of retirements. In addition, we examined
attrition patterns for supervisors and for controllers at the busiest
facilities because of their importance to the national air traffic
control operations, and we found that attrition levels for these groups
could be sizable over the next decade.
Number of Employees Eligible to Retire Increases Rapidly:
Because many controllers were hired in the early 1980s, FAA is facing
an aging controller workforce. As of June 30, 2001, the average age of
an FAA controller was 43, and approximately 7,400 controllers were 45
or older. In addition, because of the special controller retirement
provisions, many controllers may soon accrue enough years of service to
meet the retirement eligibility requirements. Because FAA‘s employee
database does not identify the amount of time controllers have worked
controlling traffic (good time), we examined the eligibility of FAA‘s
entire controller workforce (about 20,000 employees), using both the
special controller retirement provisions and the CSRS/FERS retirement
provisions.[Footnote 17] Although most of the employees would be
expected to first reach eligibility under the special provisions (20
years of good time and age 50, or 25 years of experience at any age),
some of those employees who were older when hired or were working at
positions other than actually controlling traffic (like training) might
first become eligible under CSRS or FERS provisions (age 55 with 30
years federal employment, age 60 with 20 years federal experience, or
age 62 with 5 years experience).
Our review of the eligibility data shows that about 2,500, or 12
percent of the current controller workforce, was eligible to retire at
the end of fiscal year 2001. As figure 3 shows, an increasing
percentage of current controllers will become eligible to retire
between fiscal year 2002 and 2011, with nearly 11,200 of the current
controllers becoming eligible for retirement over the next 10 years. In
addition, those already eligible, coupled with the nearly 11,200
additional controllers becoming eligible over the next 10 years, will
increase the number of current controllers eligible to retire to more
than 13,600, or 68 percent of FAA‘s total current controller workforce,
by the end of fiscal year 2011.[Footnote 18]
Figure 3: Air Traffic Controllers Becoming Eligible for Retirement in
Each Fiscal Year:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO‘s analysis of FAA‘s data.
[End of figure]
GAO Model Predicts High Attrition Levels over the Next Decade:
Our controller attrition simulation model projects that high numbers of
controllers will leave the workforce between fiscal years 2002 and
2011. Probabilities for separation were based on controller attrition
patterns between 1997 and 2000 and were applied to the 20,021
controllers at FAA as of June 30, 2001. Projections are therefore based
on the June 2001 population, and there is no adjustment for new
appointments. As shown in figure 4, the simulation model predicts that
about 600 to 800 controllers will leave each year between fiscal years
2002 and 2011, which is one and one-half to two times higher than
average attrition was over the past 5 years. It also indicates that
nearly 7,500 controllers (about 37 percent of the current controller
workforce) are projected to leave FAA by the end of fiscal year 2011.
Figure 4: Past and Simulated Air Traffic Controller Attrition, by
Fiscal Year:
[See PDF for image]
Note: --Denotes the minimum and maximum values from the simulation
model.
Source: GAO simulation using FAA database.
[End of figure]
Many Controllers Responding to GAO Survey Plan to Leave FAA Soon:
Based on the results of our survey of air traffic controllers, we
estimate that many controllers plan to leave FAA soon. Of the 20,021
controllers working at FAA as of June 30, 2001, we estimate that
approximately 5,000 controllers plan to leave (predominately because of
retirement) between fiscal years 2002 and 2006, and about 10,900 by the
end of fiscal year 2011.[Footnote 19] As shown in figure 5, we estimate
that between fiscal years 2002 and 2011, approximately 1,100
controllers on average plan to leave each year, and about
1,300[Footnote 20] controllers plan to leave in fiscal year 2007 alone-
-also the peak year for controllers reaching retirement eligibility.
These estimates are more than double the recent attrition levels that
FAA has experienced--on average, about 436 controllers separated each
year for the past 5 years.
Figure 5: Survey Estimates: Past and Estimated Air Traffic Controller
Attrition:
[End of figure]
Note: --Confidence interval: displays the upper and lower bounds of
the 95% confidence interval for each estimate.
Source: FAA‘s historical data and GAO‘s estimates based on survey
responses.
[End of figure]
We also estimate, based on the survey responses, that there are two
time frames for when controllers said they might leave or retire. An
estimated 40 percent of the controllers said they planned to leave or
retire at age 50 or earlier, and another 26 percent said they planned
to leave or retire around the maximum 56-separation age. In addition,
we also found that approximately 51 percent of controllers said they
planned to retire when they first become eligible.
Supervisor Attrition Is Likely to Increase Rapidly:
Because supervisors are important to air traffic control operations and
because they tend to be older than others controlling traffic, we
examined retirement eligibility and survey results of supervisors at
FAA as of June 2001. We found that supervisors will become eligible and
said they planned to leave FAA in very high numbers over the next
decade.
We found that 1,205, or 65 percent, of current supervisors will become
eligible to retire between 2002 and 2011. (See fig. 6.) Given that 28
percent of current supervisors are already eligible to retire and that
by 2011 another 65 percent will have reached eligibility, about 93
percent of current supervisors will be eligible to retire by the end of
fiscal year 2011. As a result, FAA may face substantial turnover in its
supervisory ranks over the next decade.
Figure 6: Past and Projected Retirement Eligibility for Supervisory Air
Traffic Controllers:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO‘s analysis of FAA database.
[End of figure]
In addition, estimates from our survey show sizable attrition through
fiscal year 2011. As shown in figure 7, we estimate that 770[Footnote
21] supervisors (about 39 percent of current supervisors) said they
plan to leave between fiscal years 2002 and 2006, and 1,503[Footnote
22] supervisors (about 76 percent of current supervisors) plan to leave
FAA, primarily through retirement, through fiscal year 2011, an average
of about 150 per year. The peak year in planned attrition is fiscal
2007, when we estimate that 221[Footnote 23] supervisors plan to leave.
This level of potential attrition for supervisors is higher than in the
past 5 years, during which an average of 71 supervisors left each year.
Figure 7: Survey Estimates: Past and Estimated Air Traffic Controller
Attrition for Supervisory Air Traffic Controllers:
[See PDF for image]
Note: --Confidence interval: displays the upper and lower bounds of the
95% confidence interval for each estimate.
Source: FAA‘s historical data and GAO‘s estimates based on survey
responses.
[End of figure]
High levels of supervisor attrition could also affect the controller
specialist workforce. To the extent that FAA replaces supervisors who
leave, increases in supervisory retirements could further reduce the
number of experienced controller specialists available to control
traffic and increase controller specialist hiring needs in order to
replace the controllers moving to supervisory positions. The overall
impact of supervisor attrition is unclear at this time. Until recently,
FAA was in the process of reducing the controller-to-supervisor ratio
from 7-to-1 to 10-to-1, through attrition, as agreed to in the 1998
NATCA collective bargaining agreement. This strategy would help
mitigate the flow of NATCA bargaining unit controllers into the
supervisory ranks. The outcome of this strategy is uncertain because
the Conference Report for the fiscal year 2002 Department of
Transportation Appropriations (H. Rpt. 107-308) stated that the
conferees were concerned about the impact of the reduction and directed
FAA not to reduce supervisory staffing further.[Footnote 24] FAA
intends to abide by this language for this fiscal year, and its future
decisions on supervisory reductions are subject to congressional
direction.
FAA‘s Busiest Facilities May Face High Attrition Levels:
Because of the crucial role played by en route centers and the busiest
terminal facilities in the national air space system, we analyzed the
impact of retirement eligibility on the 21 major en route centers, the
10 busiest airport towers, and the 10 busiest TRACON facilities. Based
on our analysis of FAA‘s employee database, we found that the en route
centers and the busiest terminal facilities will experience a sizable
increase in the number of controllers reaching retirement eligibility.
As figure 8 shows, retirement eligibility in these facilities grows
over the next decade.
Figure 8: Controllers Becoming Eligible for Retirement by Fiscal Year
for En Route Centers, Ten Busiest Towers, and Ten Busiest TRACONs:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO‘s analysis of FAA‘s data.
[End of figure]
In analyzing retirement eligibility data for the en route centers, we
found that 903, or about 11 percent, of the controllers currently at
FAA‘s 24 en route centers are already eligible to retire. Additionally,
the cumulative percentage of current controllers becoming eligible to
retire increases to about 28 percent by the end of fiscal year 2006 and
reaches about 65 percent by the end of fiscal year 2011. In terms of
the 21 major en route centers, the Jacksonville center had the highest
proportion of retirement-eligible controllers at the end of fiscal year
2001, with 79 of its 376 controllers being eligible for retirement (21
percent). By the end of fiscal year 2006, at least 29 percent of
current controllers will be eligible for retirement at 10 centers--
Albuquerque, Atlanta, Boston, Fort Worth, Houston, Jacksonville, Los
Angeles, Memphis, Seattle, and Washington, D.C.
At the 10 busiest airport towers, 76, or about 10 percent, of current
controllers are eligible to retire. The cumulative percentage rises to
about 34 percent by the end of fiscal year 2006 and reaches 74 percent
by the end of fiscal year 2011. Based on our analysis for these towers,
we found that the Denver tower had the highest proportion of
retirement-eligible controllers as of September 30, 2001, with 14 of
its 51 (27 percent) controllers being eligible to retire. By the end of
fiscal year 2006, 45 percent of Denver‘s current controllers will be
eligible to retire, and by the end of fiscal year 2011 it reaches 90
percent, as 46 of its 51 current controllers will reach retirement
eligibility.
At the 10 busiest TRACON facilities, about 199, or about 12 percent, of
current controllers are eligible to retire. The cumulative percentage
increases to about 36 percent by the end of fiscal year 2006 and
reaches about 73 percent by the end of fiscal year 2011. Based on our
analysis for these facilities, the Dallas/Fort Worth TRACON had the
highest level of current controllers eligible to retire at the end of
fiscal year 2001, with 36 of its 147 (24 percent) controllers being
eligible. By the end of fiscal year 2006, the cumulative percentage
grows to 46 percent, and by the end of fiscal year 2011 it reaches 87
percent, as 128 of the 147 controllers currently at the facility will
have reached retirement eligibility.
[End of section]
Chapter 3: FAA Needs a More Comprehensive Workforce Plan for Air
Traffic
Controllers:
Attrition of air traffic controllers will increase substantially over
the next decade, primarily because many controllers will retire. This
condition is widespread across the various air traffic control
facilities at the FAA, and the potential for massive turnover exists
even at FAA‘s most complex and busiest facilities. To effectively deal
with expected attrition, government agencies must identify human
capital needs, assess how current staff and expected future staff will
meet those needs, and create strategies to address any shortfalls or
imbalances. As we have reported, a high-performing organization
typically addresses its current and future workforce needs by
estimating the following: the number of employees it will need; the
knowledge, skills, and abilities those employees will have in order for
the organization to accomplish its goals; and the areas where employees
should be deployed across the organization.[Footnote 25] We have
developed a model that identifies strategic workforce planning as a
critical success factor in effectively managing a human capital
program, because such planning can help agencies ensure that they have
adequate staff to accomplish their missions.[Footnote 26]
Although FAA will be faced with unprecedented numbers of retirements of
its air traffic controllers, it has not yet developed a comprehensive
workforce plan to address this issue and therefore risks having a
shortage of qualified controllers. Good workforce planning includes
developing strategies for integrating hiring, recruiting, training, and
other human capital activities in a manner that meets the agency‘s
long-term objectives. FAA generally hires new controllers only when
current, experienced controllers leave, and it does not adequately take
into account the time necessary to fully train these replacements.
Furthermore, although FAA intends to increasingly hire individuals with
no prior controller experience, its new aptitude test for potential
candidates may not be as effective in screening them as initially
planned. In addition, FAA has not provided its training academy with
the resources necessary to handle the expected large increase in
controller candidates. Finally, exemptions to the mandatory age 56-
separation provision raise equity and safety issues. FAA therefore
might face a shortage of experienced controllers, leading to an
increase in overtime logged by its remaining controllers. Increased
flight delays might also result from this situation, as fewer
controllers might not be able to safely guide the same number of
flights that would be possible with a fully staffed controller
workforce.
FAA‘s Hiring Process Does Not Adequately Ensure that Qualified
Controllers Will Be Available When Necessary:
A key component of workforce planning is ensuring that appropriately
skilled employees are available when and where they are needed to meet
an agency‘s mission. This means, in part, that an agency continually
needs trained employees becoming available to fill newly opened
positions. FAA‘s current hiring process does not adequately ensure that
qualified replacements are available to expeditiously assume the
responsibilities of those who retire. The main objective of FAA‘s
branch manager for resource management is to ensure that controller-
staffing levels meet the levels called for in FAA‘s contract with the
controller‘s union (NATCA). To do this, he estimates how many
controller specialists will leave during the year and allocates this
number among regions as a target-hiring figure. On at least a quarterly
basis, he informs the officials in the regions how many controller
candidates they are allowed to hire for that period. If attrition is
lower than expected during that period, he may tell them to delay
hiring until a later quarter. For example, in fiscal year 2001, the
plan called for hiring 425 controller candidates but, because of lower-
than-expected attrition levels, FAA hired only 358 new controllers.
According to this official, FAA does not have budgetary resources to
maintain and develop an employee pipeline to ensure that fully
certified replacements are available, so it has no plans to change
these hiring practices.
FAA‘s approach of hiring new employees only when current employees
leave does not adequately account for the time needed to train
controllers to fully perform their functions, or for the increased
retirements that are projected in the short and long terms. The amount
of time it takes new controllers to gain certification depends on the
facilities at which they will work, but it generally takes from 2 to 4
years and can take up to 5 years at some of the busiest and most
complex facilities.
The branch manager‘s May 2001 hiring plan identifies a ’hiring lead
time adjustment“ starting in fiscal year 2004 that provides for
additional hiring in recognition of the time necessary to train
employees. The numbers included, however, do not appear adequate to
account for the large potential increases in controller attrition. For
example, in fiscal year 2004, the adjustment is for hiring 70 extra
candidates, which would respond to a potential attrition of about 700
to 1,100 controllers in 2006, when these new hires might be ready for
certification at some facilities. In addition, the branch manager told
us that budget constraints play a key role in determining the timing of
hiring new candidates. For example, he said that budget requests are
tied to the NATCA contract amounts and that FAA had no plans to request
the additional funding necessary to go above those levels. FAA
officials also stressed that staffing management is now a partnership
between FAA and NATCA, and that this also creates constraints on FAA‘s
ability to hire and place new controllers at specific facilities.
FAA regional officials, who are responsible for ensuring that FAA‘s air
traffic facilities are adequately staffed, are particularly concerned
about FAA‘s replacement-hiring policy. Eight of nine regional officials
with whom we spoke stated that they would like for FAA to allow them to
hire new controller staff above their authorized levels so that
experienced, fully qualified controllers will be ready when current
controllers retire. The officials were particularly concerned that
significant increases in retirement rates among veteran controllers
would leave the facilities short of qualified controllers while new
trainees are hired and trained. Several regions stated that they had
made formal and informal requests to FAA headquarters to obtain
additional controllers who could be hired and trained in advance of
future retirements. In May 2001, for example, officials from FAA‘s
Southwest Region formally requested 48 additional staff members to
mitigate the impact of future retirements. The region asked for new
hires at one of its en route centers to ’ensure that quality customer
service is maintained, budgetary concerns are addressed, and controller
attrition is dealt with.“ In April 2002, FAA headquarters informed the
region that their request was denied because of operational constraints
imposed by the 1998 agreement with the controllers‘ union and because
of the current fiscal year‘s budgetary constraints. Furthermore,
numerous FAA regional officials told us that they were frustrated by
their agency‘s insistence on staffing as close to the numbers called
for in the NATCA contract as possible.
A lack of experienced controllers could have many adverse consequences,
according to several FAA regional officials. Several regional officials
stated that if a facility becomes seriously short of experienced
controllers, the remaining controllers might have to slow down the flow
of air traffic through their airspace. If the situation became dire,
FAA could require airlines to reduce their schedules, but this would be
an unlikely, worst-case scenario, according to some FAA regional
officials. Also, because there would be fewer experienced controllers
available to work, some FAA facility officials stated that those
controllers could see increased workloads and additional, potentially
mandatory, overtime. Some facility managers told us that they expected
this increased burden to result in additional work-related stress for
the remaining controllers, which would increase sick leave usage. It
could also cause experienced controllers to retire sooner than they
otherwise might. For example, based on our survey results, we estimate
that 33 percent of controllers would accelerate their decision to
retire if forced to work additional mandatory overtime.
FAA Developed Screening Test to Help Identify Potential Candidates Most
Likely to Succeed:
Identifying sources of future potential employees with the requisite
skills and aptitude is another key piece of a comprehensive workforce
plan. As discussed in chapter 1, FAA historically has hired its new
controllers from a variety of sources, including graduates of
institutions in FAA‘s collegiate training initiative program, the
Minneapolis Community and Technical College, candidates already on a
list maintained by OPM, controllers formerly employed by FAA who were
fired by President Reagan in 1981, and former DOD controllers. Table 5
shows the sources and number of new controllers that FAA hired between
fiscal years 1997 and 2001.
Table 5: Sources of New Controllers, Fiscal Years 1997-2001:
Source: Collegiate Training Initiative; 1997: 161; 1998: 50; 1999: 60;
2000: 119; 2001[A]: 75; Total: 465.
Source: Minneapolis Community and Technical College; 1997: 32; 1998:
48; 1999: 52; 2000: 77; 2001[A]: 82; Total: 291.
Source: Office of Personnel Management; 1997: 4; 1998: 14; 1999: 14;
2000: 9; 2001[A]: 7; Total: 48.
Source: Reinstated employees; 1997: 26; 1998: 12; 1999: 4; 2000: 7;
2001[A]: 16; Total: 65.
Source: Former controllers fired in 1981; 1997: 188; 1998: 289; 1999:
30; 2000: 41; 2001[A]: 14; Total: 562.
Source: Department of Defense; 1997: 89; 1998: 355; 1999: 96; 2000:
136; 2001[A]: 117; Total: 793.
Source: Total; 1997: 500; 1998: 768; 1999: 256; 2000: 389; 2001[A]:
311; Total: 2,224.
[A] Partial year data.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of FAA regional data.
[End of table]
DOD officials were concerned that increasing retirements of FAA‘s
controllers over the next 5 years will cause greater operational
problems, and possibly affect defense readiness, if potentially
thousands of DOD controllers were to fill openings at FAA. DOD has lost
many controllers to FAA--about 35 percent of FAA‘s hires in the past 5
years. FAA‘s regional officials told us that they like to hire former
military controllers because of their experience, maturity, and work
ethic. DOD officials with whom we spoke explained that these losses had
resulted in cutbacks for fighter training missions by at least one of
the armed services and in the implementation of significant retention
bonuses to military controllers. Although DOD employs both civilian and
uniformed military controllers, there remains a pay disparity between
DOD and FAA. These officials believe that the higher pay offered by FAA
explains why DOD military and civilian controllers apply for FAA
controller jobs. For example, in fiscal year 2001, the maximum base
salary levels for DOD controllers were $48,730 for a DOD military
controller and $74,553 for a DOD civilian controller, while FAA
controllers could earn up to $128,386.[Footnote 27] DOD officials
stated that both agencies (FAA and DOD) must meet their recruiting and
retention goals to support national security and defense requirements.
To that end, DOD officials said that the focus needs to be on the
requirement for air traffic controllers as a whole and not on two
competing systems.
Along these lines, FAA headquarters officials said that because FAA
hopes to achieve a more diverse workforce, it expects to concentrate
increasingly on hiring off-the-street candidates. The success of the
off-the-street hiring depends in large part on identifying potential
candidates who have an appropriate aptitude for controllers‘ work.
Traditionally, FAA used the academy‘s initial entry-training program to
screen out candidates who could not become successful controllers.
According to FAA officials, as many as 50 percent of off-the-street
applicants have dropped out before finishing the required training
program. These officials estimated that about $10 million per year was
spent on training candidates who later failed the program. FAA
therefore developed a new screening exam, known as AT-SAT, to better
ensure that the new hires have the skills and abilities to succeed on
the job. FAA plans to require that candidates without prior experience
pass the 8-hour AT-SAT exam before they begin training at its academy.
According to academy officials, the academy is planning to rely on AT-
SAT as a way to screen out candidates unlikely to pass the academy‘s
training, and it has therefore revised its training program to
emphasize teaching skill-sets rather than serving as a screening
program.
Uncertainty exists regarding the exam‘s ability to screen out
unsuccessful candidates and help ensure that new candidates have the
aptitude to become successful controllers. For example, FAA has
recently changed the exam to allow more candidates to pass, which
creates some uncertainty about its ability to identify successful
candidates. During initial validation of AT-SAT, FAA found that the
test should predict, with a high level of validity, that those who
passed it would become successful controllers. However, FAA found that
only about 28 percent of non-FAA test subjects and about 62 percent of
active controllers could pass the test. In addition, they found that
passing rates for some applicant groups, including particularly
African-Americans and females, might be significantly lower than the
overall passing rates. Therefore, FAA concluded that the passing score
on the test was set higher than the typical controller‘s job
expectations. As a result, the developers of the exam changed the
weight given to different portions of the exam and adjusted the passing
score to tie the test more accurately to the actual job performance of
controllers. According to FAA, this will result in more applicants
passing the exam (68 percent are now expected to pass).
FAA plans to begin using the test in June 2002. Although FAA has not
revalidated the effectiveness of the revised exam, FAA officials stated
that they have long planned to perform an operational evaluation of the
exam to assess how well the exam works in practice, and that they are
currently considering two options for performing this evaluation.
First, FAA could correlate candidates‘ scores on the exam with how well
they perform on a computer simulation of actual air traffic. In order
to implement this option, FAA would have to develop a new computer-
based performance measure for the terminal environment. Officials
indicated that this would cost several hundred thousand dollars. The
second option would be to validate the exam against initial training at
the academy, field training, and job performance. This would require
FAA to develop criteria for measuring success in each of these three
areas. In any case, to evaluate the exam, the officials need to decide
on an option, develop a detailed implementation plan, and identify
funding for this purpose. Officials could not provide an estimate as to
when they will decide on a specific option. Until the results are
evaluated, the operational effectiveness of the exam will be unknown.
Challenges Exist in Addressing Academy and On-the-Job Training
Resources and Equipment Needs:
Workforce planning should consider the approach and resources necessary
for providing new employees with the means to acquire the knowledge,
skills, and abilities to accomplish the agency‘s mission. However, FAA
has not adequately addressed the challenges associated with providing
the training resources--specifically training staff, equipment, and
opportunities for on-the-job training--needed for large increases in
new hires. Most controller candidates undergo both 15 weeks of
classroom exercises at FAA‘s academy in Oklahoma City and on-the-job
training at the facility where employees are assigned. As of March
2002, the academy was staffed with 91 FAA employees and 60 contractors.
This number of employees and contractors has been used to train, on
average, about 200 new hires for each of the past 5 years. The
academy‘s training plan anticipates that between 547 and 980 controller
candidates might need training each year through fiscal year 2005. To
meet the projected levels, these officials believe they will need up to
50 additional staff to provide training.
The training academy may have difficulty recruiting current controllers
to conduct portions of their training program. Academy officials told
us that their recent attempts to persuade experienced controllers to
volunteer to train new recruits have not been very successful. Academy
officials explained that the 1998 pay raise, which in some cases
increased salaries for controllers by more than 30 percent but applied
only to periods when the controllers were actually guiding air traffic,
has affected the controllers‘ willingness to participate. Whereas a
controller was once paid the same amount for providing training as for
controlling traffic, under the new system a controller would lose pay
by becoming a trainer at the academy. Academy officials said they
recently put an announcement out asking for volunteers to conduct
training and received 31 applications. They noted that before the pay
raise they were receiving hundreds of applications for these positions,
which provided them a greater opportunity to select from a broader
pool.
Equipment deficiencies also hamper the academy. For example, the
academy is training en-route controllers on equipment that is not used
at actual en-route centers, so controllers must retrain on different
equipment once they reach their facilities. To efficiently train en-
route and terminal controllers, academy officials told us that they
need a specialized en-route simulator lab known as a Display System
Replacement lab, which costs between $7 million to $45 million,
depending on the sophistication of the model purchased. Academy
officials have been trying to obtain this equipment for several years,
and the academy has recently made another proposal regarding this
equipment. FAA headquarters is expected to decide whether to purchase
this lab in the near future. In addition, the academy uses tower
simulators to give trainees experience with controlling traffic in a
computer-simulated environment. However, academy officials said their
current simulators are often broken, outdated, and lacking in the
necessary capacity to train large numbers of new hires. The cost of the
new equipment is estimated at $2 million. If FAA does not make these
investments, academy officials said, controller candidates will need
more training time when they reach their facilities.
New controllers might also have difficulty obtaining on-the-job
training, FAA regional officials stated. New controllers are to receive
their facility training from fully certified controllers already
working in that facility. Under FAA‘s current hiring system and
estimated attrition rates, however, there will be fewer experienced
controllers to provide training and more new hires in need of training.
More time will thus likely be needed to train new controllers. This
situation could be particularly acute at FAA‘s en-route centers and
busy terminal facilities, because it takes longer to train replacement
controllers at these facilities. Retirements at these facilities are
expected to increase the burden on the remaining experienced controller
staff.
Exemptions to the Age 56 Separation Provision Raise Safety and Equity
Concerns:
Ensuring that a workforce retains employees with the requisite skills
and abilities is another important piece of workforce planning. As
described in chapter 1, legislation passed in 1972 stipulates that air
traffic controllers must separate at age 56.[Footnote 28] Some
controllers are exempt from the retirement rule, however, and continue
to work beyond age 56. This practice raises two concerns: (1) whether
the skills and abilities of the older controllers have diminished, thus
potentially compromising safety; and (2) whether the exemptions result
in unequal treatment for some controllers.
In 1972, Congress directed that ’an air traffic controller shall be
separated from the service on the last day of the month in which he
becomes 56 years of age.“[Footnote 29] The House Report associated with
this law justifies the provision by stating that ’air traffic control
is a young man‘s business—and that because of the natural forces of
aging, magnified by the stresses of control functions, the productive
and proficient life of the controller is substantially less than that
which prevails in most other occupations.“[Footnote 30] In addition,
the report states, ’the controllers themselves are convinced that the
demands of their job are so great that only young, healthy adults can
consistently do a safe, competent job of controlling the steadily
growing volume of air traffic.“ The House Report further states that
’as the controller approaches age 50 his mental faculties of alertness,
rapid decision making, and instantaneous reaction—begin a definite
decline.“ In addition, the associated Senate Report[Footnote 31]
states, ’like skilled athletes, most controllers lose proficiency to
some degree after age 40, and in the interest of the public‘s safety,
should not be retained as controllers in busy facilities beyond the
time they can perform satisfactorily.“:
The law‘s provision requires mandatory separation at age 56 for
controllers who separate and control air traffic; provide preflight,
in-flight, or airport advisory service to aircraft operators; or serve
as the immediate supervisors of any employee who performs these duties.
These positions include controller specialists and their first-line
supervisors as well as traffic management coordinators and their first-
line supervisors.
Some controllers who separate and control traffic are exempted from
this provision, however, including controllers appointed by the
Department of Transportation (DOT) before May 16, 1972, and controllers
appointed by DOD before September 12, 1980. In addition, those
controllers covered by the FERS retirement system can continue working
past age 56 until they have reached 20 years of service in a covered
position (so called good time under the special air traffic controller
retirement provisions). Similarly, on November 12, 2001, the president
signed a law allowing controllers covered by the CSRS retirement system
to work in covered positions past age 56 until they first become
eligible for retirement annuities under any retirement
scenario.[Footnote 32]
Our analyses of FAA‘s employee database shows that approximately 700 of
those
controllers currently engaged in separation and control of traffic are
exempt
from the requirement and have already turned age 56, and another 1,200
will
reach 56 by December 31, 2006, if they do not leave FAA before then.
According to FAA, 287 controllers were appointed by DOT before May 16,
1972, and are exempt from the requirement. Most of the remaining
exempted controllers were either appointed by DOD before September 12,
1980, or are covered by FERS provisions.
FAA also has the statutory authority to waive the age provision on a
case-by-case basis. The applicable law states that ’the Secretary of
Transportation, under such regulations as he may prescribe, may exempt
a controller having exceptional skill and experience as a controller
from the automatic separation provisions of this subsection until that
controller becomes 61 years of age.“[Footnote 33] However, according to
an FAA Headquarters official, FAA has never granted an age waiver to
the mandatory separation provision. Further, since 1995, it has been
FAA‘s policy not to grant any age waivers. This official also stated
that most controllers are aware of the difficulty in obtaining an age
waiver and do not even apply for one--only seven controllers have
applied for a waiver since 1995. Despite this view, many controllers
said they would like the opportunity to work past the age of 56. Our
survey indicates that many controllers would continue to work if they
were permitted to do so; approximately 31 percent of respondents cited
the opportunity to work past age 56 as a factor that could lead them to
delay their retirement plans. In addition, regional FAA officials said
they would like to have the flexibility to retain some of these
experienced controllers.
As mentioned above, safety concerns formed the basis of the age-56
separation provision. Only limited actions have been taken, however, to
assess whether those controllers who are exempted from the provision
have adequately retained the skills and abilities necessary to perform
their duties. FAA requires all controllers to pass annual physical
examinations that test sight, hearing, and overall health conditions.
No additional tests--such as for mental acuity or changes in reaction
time--are given to controllers who surpass age 56.
The equity issues associated with the exemptions to the age-56
separation rule could become more prominent in the future if FAA
continues to rehire controllers fired during the 1981 strike. In 1993
President Clinton, through presidential directive, lifted the ban on
hiring former striking employees. In the past 5 years, FAA has rehired
about 850 controllers who were fired in 1981. The average age of the
733 still working as of June 30, 2001, was 54, and about 35 percent
were aged 56 or older. The oldest was 69 as of June 30, 2001. In
addition, FAA officials said that most of the rehires are exempt from
the mandatory separation provisions because they were originally hired
before May 16, 1972. Further, recently a group of controllers fired
during the 1981 strike filed a class action lawsuit alleging that FAA
discriminates against such controllers because of their age. Depending
on the outcome of this lawsuit, about 2,000 former controllers--many
aged 50 and above--could be given hiring priority.
Conclusions:
Although the attrition scenarios projected by FAA and us reflect
estimates of the future, and any particular estimate in any given year
is subject to varying degrees of uncertainty, the overall results
suggest that FAA will face significant personnel challenges. If
controllers leave at a quicker pace than estimated, the situation may
become even more difficult for FAA, as it would have to swiftly replace
its seasoned controllers with new controllers possessing lesser
experience. To the extent that controllers leave at a slower pace than
estimated, FAA will have a larger window of opportunity to replenish
its workforce. Ultimately, FAA‘s ability to successfully plan for and
manage this situation will dictate its overall impact on the nation‘s
air traffic control system and the safety and efficiency of air travel
in the United States.
The employees whom FAA will need to replace possess unique skills and
are critical to the safety and efficiency of the nation‘s air
transportation system. FAA, as the agency responsible for managing this
workforce, does not have a comprehensive workforce plan to help manage
the expected turnover. An effective human capital process anticipates
expected attrition and includes the development of a comprehensive
workforce plan that (1) establishes an effective approach for hiring
individuals with the requisite skills and abilities in time to
accomplish agency missions, (2) provides new employees with the best
training opportunities possible to maximize their potential, and (3)
uses opportunities to retain qualified staff.
FAA‘s approach to workforce planning does not adequately address these
strategies, raising the risk that the safety and efficiency of the
nation‘s air transportation system will be adversely affected. In
addition, if FAA does not take steps to develop and implement a more
comprehensive workforce strategy, increased traffic delays and overtime
costs could result. FAA‘s practice of hiring replacements for
controllers only after a position is vacated leaves the agency
vulnerable to skills imbalances, with inexperienced and uncertified
controllers replacing seasoned veterans. This situation may be
exacerbated at individual air traffic control facilities because the
age and experience of controllers varies across the system, which could
cause some locations to experience additional staffing challenges. Also
of concern are the effects of the recent scoring changes that were made
to the test used to screen potential candidates. Until the screening
test results are examined, the ability of the exam to identify
candidates who will make successful controllers will not be known.
Further, the quality of the training that controllers receive could be
compromised because FAA has not addressed the human resources and
equipment needs of its training academy, despite the growing projected
student population. Finally, safety and equity issues associated with
the age-56 separation exemptions could affect the morale of the
controller workforce and the safety of air traffic.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To help meet the challenges presented by hiring thousands of new
controller candidates, we recommend that the secretary of
transportation direct the administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration to develop a comprehensive workforce plan that includes
strategies for:
* Identifying the number and timing of hiring necessary to ensure that
facilities have an adequate number of certified controllers available
to perform needed duties. As part of this effort, FAA should determine
and plan for the expected attrition levels and timing at each facility;
* Evaluating the newly developed screening test to determine whether it
is identifying the most successful candidates;
* Addressing the resource and equipment needs at the training academy
to help ensure that FAA is in a position to successfully train a
growing number of controller candidates; and:
* Assessing the safety and equity issues associated with exempting
potentially large numbers of controllers from the mandatory age-56
separation requirement.
Agency Comments and GAO‘s Evaluation:
In commenting on a draft of this report, senior FAA officials found
that the report was generally accurate and indicated that they would
consider our recommendations in FAA‘s workforce planning.
Overall, FAA stressed that it has a working human capital workforce
strategy model that has enabled the agency to meet its staffing goals
over the past few years. FAA officials agreed that the potential for
sizable future attrition, in the range of 600-800 controllers per year,
is likely over the next decade. The officials said, however, that
although they have plans that extend to 2010, the uncertainty
surrounding the future, along with labor contracts and budget
constraints, limit their specific workforce planning for air traffic
controllers to fiscal years 2002 through 2004. With general agreement
between FAA and GAO that attrition will grow substantially over the
next decade, we believe that the workforce challenges FAA faces extend
well beyond fiscal year 2004. As such, we believe that sound workforce
planning demands that FAA develop a strategic vision that includes a
workable, long-term plan to meet staffing needs.
Regarding our concern about FAA‘s preparedness for the future, the FAA
officials remarked that FAA‘s ability to meet its past goals is an
indication of its ability to meet future needs, and that there is
nothing to indicate that its successful performance will not continue
in the future. We recognize that FAA has been able to meet its recent
staffing goals. However, the recent workforce climate for FAA could be
significantly different from that which it will face over the next
decade. Chapter two of the report highlights the workforce challenges,
particularly the sizable anticipated increases in controller attrition,
that are likely over the next decade, and this chapter identifies
challenges in FAA‘s planning that will make it difficult for FAA to
maintain its past performance. In particular, the report points out the
potential skills gap that FAA could face in the future because its
current hiring process does not ensure that fully qualified controllers
are available to replace experienced controllers when they leave.
The officials also commented that FAA has long planned for an
operational evaluation of the new screening exam, and that research
associated with this evaluation has been underway for some time. The
officials indicated that they are considering two options for
evaluating the effectiveness of the exam. The officials commented,
however, that limited work has been done on the evaluation process
since 1998, and that they must determine which option to pursue,
develop a detailed implementation plan, and identify funding for the
evaluation. The officials further noted that continued funding for the
ongoing research could not be assured. In response to this comment, we
revised the text of the report to recognize FAA‘s efforts and plans
regarding evaluation of the new screening exam. As such, we are
encouraged that FAA plans to conduct an operational evaluation of the
exam, once it has been implemented. However, we remain concerned that
FAA has not decided how it will conduct the evaluation or how it will
fund it and has already highlighted potential funding issues that could
serve as a constraint to performing the planned evaluation. Further, we
believe that an evaluation of the revised exam is an integral part of a
comprehensive workforce plan and have modified the recommendation to
emphasize this belief.
Finally, the FAA officials provided technical comments that we
incorporated, as appropriate. For example, we added information in this
chapter to highlight the constraints that FAA‘s labor contract and
budget impose on the timing of hiring controllers.
[End of section]
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Potential Impacts of Proposed Changes to Increase Air
Traffic Control Annuity Calculations:
In May 2001, a bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate that would amend
annuity computations for air traffic controllers retiring under the
CSRS system.[Footnote 34] It would provide controllers with an
additional 2 percent to their annuity computation for each year of
service past 20 years. Under CSRS, air traffic controllers are
guaranteed the greater of either (a) 50 percent of their average
highest 3 years salary (high-3) or (b) the basic CSRS annuity, which is
1.5 percent of the high-3 for the first 5 years, 1.75 percent of the
high-3 for the next 5 years, and 2 percent of the high-3 for the
remaining years. In general, annuity calculations under the special
provisions are greater than under the basic CSRS formula until a
controller has attained 27 years of service. The controllers‘ union
supports this proposed legislation and believes it serves as an
incentive to keep controllers on the job beyond their date of
retirement eligibility. The bill, however, would create substantial
financial impacts to the federal treasury.
Proposed Bill Would Increase Annuities:
The controllers‘ union notes that while CSRS controllers may receive an
annuity of 50 percent of their high-3 salaries after 20 years of
service at age 50 or after 25 years and any age, there is little
incentive to continue working longer because the amount of the annuity
does not grow until a controller accrues 27 years of service. For
example, as shown in table 6, a controller with the same high-3 salary
has the same level of annuity whether he or she has worked 20 or 25
years.
Table 6: Current and Proposed Annuity Calculations:
Current years of service: 20; High-3 salary: $100,000; Higher of
current special rule annuity (50 percent of high-3 or basic CSRS):
$50,000; Proposed annuity
(2 percent for each year over 20): $50,000.
Current years of service: 25; High-3 salary: 100,000; Higher of current
special rule annuity (50 percent of high-3 or basic CSRS): 50,000;
Proposed annuity
(2 percent for each year over 20): 60,000.
Current years of service: 27; High-3 salary: 100,000; Higher of current
special rule annuity (50 percent of high-3 or basic CSRS): 50,250;
Proposed annuity
(2 percent for each year over 20): 64,000.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of table]
Under the proposed bill, controllers would receive an extra 2 percent
to their annuities for every year of service past 20 years. As the
above table shows, this would increase the annuity calculation. In
addition, the union notes that federal firefighters and law enforcement
officials receive increased annuities after 20 years of service. The
union also points out that such an incentive could be useful in keeping
controllers working longer, which would help address the expected
upcoming increase in retirements.
Proposed Bill Would Create Financial Impacts:
This proposal does not take into account the existing incentives that
encourage controllers to work past the point when they first become
eligible for retirement. First, a controller receives a full salary for
each year he or she continues working as a controller. This level of
income is significantly higher than what controllers would receive from
their retirement annuities. For example, many controllers who are
eligible for retirement are making in excess of $100,000 per year.
Assuming they would retire under the controllers‘ current special
rules, the differential would be at least $50,000 in the first year.
Second, controllers receive annual pay increases like other federal
employees, which increase the amount of salary they receive and also
increase the annuity levels. Table 7 shows examples of retirement
annuity calculations for an individual controller, including projected
salary increases, with 20 years of service at 50 years of age, 25 years
of service at 55 years of age, and 26 years of service at 56 years of
age. Also shown is the effect of current federal retirement rules for
other federal employees, which contain annuity penalties for federal
employees who retire before age 55.
Table 7: Retirement Annuity Calculations under Current CSRS and S. 871:
Age: 50; Years of service: 20; High-3[A]: $100,000; Current special
rule annuity (50%): $50,000; Proposed annuity (with 2% increase):
$50,000; Current federal CSRS basic annuity: $32,676[D].
Age: 55; Years of service: 25; High-3[A]: 112,551; Current special rule
annuity (50%): 56,275; Proposed annuity (with 2% increase): 67,530[B];
Current federal CSRS basic annuity: 52,055.
Age: 56; Years of service: 26; High-3[A]: 115,928; Current special rule
annuity (50%): 57,964; Proposed annuity (with 2% increase): 71,875[C];
Current federal CSRS basic annuity: 55,935.
[A] Assumes 3% annual growth. :
[B] $56,275 plus 2 percent of the high-3 for 5 years--each year of
service after 20.
[C] $57,964 plus 2 percent of the high-3 for 6 years.
[D] The CSRS calculation includes an age penalty of 2 percent per year
for each year prior to age 55 that a federal employee retires. It also
assumes that employees with these ages and years of service would be
allowed to retire with immediate annuity. Otherwise, these individuals
would need to wait until turning 60 to begin receiving these amounts.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of table]
The table above also shows the potential financial impacts that the
bill would create for individual controllers. For example, a controller
with 26 years of service and a high-3 of approximately $116,000 would
receive an annual increase of roughly $14,000 during each year of his
or her annuity.
To determine the overall financial impact of the proposed bill, OPM
prepared an analysis of the bill‘s long-term costs. OPM estimated that
the cost of the bill to the treasury had a present value of $1.7
billion. In addition, OPM found that the higher benefit levels under
the proposal could potentially encourage somewhat earlier retirements,
because employees with 24 years of service would receive the same
benefit they now get with 31 years of service (that is, 58 percent of
the high-3).
[End of section]
Appendix II: Air Traffic Controller Schools:
Figure 9: Locations of Air Traffic Controller Schools:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO presentation of FAA data.
[End of figure]
Table 8: Current Capacities of Air Traffic Controller Schools, as of
November 2001:
School: Daniel Webster College; Type of degree program: 4-year; Current
number of students: 9; Current program capacity: 20.
School: University of North Dakota; Type of degree program: 4-year;
Current number of students: 68; Current program capacity: 119.
School: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University; Type of degree program:
4-year; Current number of students: 24; Current program capacity: 45.
School: Miami-Dade Community College; Type of degree program: 2-year;
Current number of students: 30; Current program capacity: 80-100.
School: Purdue University; Type of degree program: 4-year; Current
number of students: 52; Current program capacity: 800.
School: Community College of Beaver County; Type of degree program: 2-
year; Current number of students: 139; Current program capacity: 139.
School: Dowling College; Type of degree program: 4-year; Current number
of students: 9; Current program capacity: Unknown.
School: Inter American University of Puerto Rico; Type of degree
program: 5-year; Current number of students: 12; Current program
capacity: 15.
School: Middle Tennessee State University; Type of degree program: 4-
year; Current number of students: 18; Current program capacity: 18.
School: College of Aeronautics; Type of degree program: 2-or 4-year;
Current number of students: 17; Current program capacity: 100.
School: Mt. San Antonio College; Type of degree program: 2-year;
Current number of students: 40; Current program capacity: Near
capacity.
School: Hampton University; Type of degree program: 4-year; Current
number of students: 1; Current program capacity: 20.
School: University of Alaska-Anchorage; Type of degree program: 2-or 4-
year; Current number of students: 62; Current program capacity: 90.
Source: GAO interviews with school representatives.
[End of section]
Appendix III: Retirement Eligibility Methodology and Analysis:
A key piece of information needed to assess FAA‘s controller staffing
is knowing when controllers will become eligible to retire. To
determine when FAA‘s series 2152 controllers will become eligible to
retire, we obtained selected demographic information from FAA‘s
personnel database for all 22,865 controllers (categorized as series
2152) working at FAA as of June 30, 2001. Because we wanted to focus on
those controllers who are or could be involved in managing air traffic,
we eliminated the 2,844 flight service station controllers from our
analyses, leaving a total of 20,021 controllers.
For the 20,021 controllers on board as of June 30, 2001, we determined
the earliest date when they would become eligible to retire based on
age at hire at FAA, retirement plan, years of service at FAA, and years
of pre-FAA, retirement-creditable service. All FAA service was assumed
to be in good time and creditable toward air traffic controller special
retirement provisions (25 years of service at any age, and 20 years of
service at age 50). For example, to compute the eligibility dates of
controllers hired by FAA at an age younger than 26, we added 25 years
to their FAA service entry dates. The eligibility date for controllers
entering FAA from the ages of 26 up to 30 was calculated to be the date
they turned 50 years of age. Eligibility for those from ages 30 through
35 was calculated by adding 20 years to their FAA service entry date.
For controllers entering FAA after the age of 35, eligibility dates
were based on the provisions of their retirement plans (CSRS or FERS)
and the amount of retirement-creditable service they had before
entering FAA. Whether the individual first became eligible under air
traffic controller special rules or regular CSRS/FERS rules was
dependent on the number of years of creditable prior service he or she
had upon entry at FAA.
To provide a context for projected eligibility trends, we calculated
the number of controllers becoming eligible to retire each year between
1997 and 2001, using the same method described above, with FAA
personnel data from fiscal years 1997 through 2001. We also stratified
our analyses of controllers by facility type, supervisory status,
selected location, and position. The positions we examined included
supervisors, certified professional controllers, traffic management
coordinators, controllers not controlling traffic, developmental
controllers, and trainees.
[End of section]
Appendix IV: Methodology for Computer Simulation:
To assess the impact of estimated separations for the career
controllers between fiscal years 2002 and 2011, we analyzed past
separation trends and used these factors in estimating future
controller separations.
Analysis of Separation Trends:
We analyzed FAA‘s fiscal year-1997 through fiscal year-2000 data for
separations for the career air traffic controllers. In doing so, we
categorized past separations into voluntary retirements, other
retirements, and all other separations. For separations, we calculated
years of service by finding the difference between the service
computation date and the date of actual separation. Similarly, we
calculated age at separation by finding the difference between the date
of birth and the date of separation. We calculated the age and years of
service for the air traffic controllers on board at the end of the
fiscal year similarly, but used September 30TH as the end date.
For each 2-year interval of years of service and age of those who
separated from FAA during the period 1997 through 2000, we calculated
the probability of leaving by dividing the number who separated by the
number of controllers with a similar combination of years of service
and age who were on board at the end of the fiscal year preceding the
fiscal year of separations. We also bound all controllers into those 64
years and above, as well as all controllers with 32 or more years of
service. We then modeled the rate of separation as a function of years
of service, age, and CSRS/FERS retirement status. We developed an
equation that estimates the rate of separation for any age, years of
service, and CSRS/FERS retirement status.
Estimation Methodology of Future FAA Controller Separations:
We applied a simulation technique to each of the 20,021 controllers on
board in 2001. Each controller‘s age and years of service was used as
input into the model described above. Based on the model, an individual
controller was considered to have separated if his or her predicted
rate of separation was less than a generated random number. If the
predicted value was greater than a generated random number, then the
individual controller was deemed not to have separated. This process
was repeated for each of the 20,021 controllers. The process was then
continued for those controllers who were not estimated as having
separated in 2001, but with each controller now being 1 year older and
having 1 more year of service. As before, the controller‘s new age and
new years of service were used as input into the model, and a predicted
rate of separation was contrasted with a newly generated random number
to determine whether the controller was considered as separated in
2002. A separation decision was made for each of the remaining
controllers, and either each controller was counted as having separated
in 2002 or else 1 year was again added to both age and years of
service. This process was repeated 11 times to represent an 11-year
horizon.
Because we are dealing with a process that is of a probabilistic nature
(that is, a controller may or may not have separated in any one year),
we repeated the process 100 times. The results of the 100 iterations
were then averaged to estimate the number of controllers separating in
2001 through 2011.
Limitations:
We developed a mathematical model in order to calculate any individual
controller‘s rate of separation, which was based on three criteria: (1)
FERS/CSRS retirement status, (2) age at any point during the 11-year
horizon, and (3) years of service at any point during the 11-year
horizon. This mathematical model was based on the retirement rates for
the same three conditions: FERS/CSRS retirement status, age, and years
of service for the 4 previous years. The optimization in developing the
mathematical model, known as regression analysis, is to minimize the
squared differences between the actual rates of separation and the
predicted rates of separation. An index, which is known as the squared
correlation coefficient and is bounded between zero and one, is one
useful numerical quantity to assess the strength or predictive power of
the mathematical model. A perfect fit in a model would yield a squared
correlation coefficient of 1.00. In our mathematical model, we achieved
a squared correlation coefficient of .79. Thus, we were able to capture
and predict about four-fifths of the variability in the rates of
separation for the 4 years‘ worth of separation data. One limitation,
therefore, is that our model does not predict with 100 percent accuracy
the actual rates of separation, although it is uncommon in real world
applications to find such a high squared correlation when dealing with
behavioral data such as separating from controller service. It is also
worth noting that associated factors such as an individual‘s health,
race, sex, or even children‘s ages and college status may affect his or
her decision to separate. These other factors were either not available
or not included in the mathematical model.
Another limitation in simulating the separation from service, which is
based on a mathematical model, includes the concept of using the
previous patterns of separating from service to generate the
mathematical model. If the rate of separation for those individual
controllers starting in 2001 is different from the previous 4-year
patterns, then we introduce a source of error into the simulation. As
mentioned earlier, many factors are possible in deciding to separate
from service, which may include something unique or something that for
many controllers does not manifest itself until 2001 or beyond. It is
possible that the controllers who came aboard in 1982 and beyond will
separate at either higher or lower rates of separation than those of
their counterparts who began their service at an earlier time. This
variability cannot be assessed until actual rates of separation occur
and should be very closely monitored by the FAA.
[End of section]
Appendix V: Methodology for GAO‘s Survey of Air Traffic Controllers‘
Retirement and Attrition Plans:
A primary objective in this study was to determine the number or
proportion of current air traffic controllers who plan to retire each
year, over the upcoming 10-year period. To meet this objective, among
other things, we surveyed a statistically representative sample of air
traffic controller personnel. We developed and administered a survey
designed to obtain the views of selected air traffic controller
personnel regarding issues associated with attrition, with emphasis on
retirement. The survey was mailed in August 2001 to a stratified sample
of 2,100 controllers. As of February 12, 2002, we had received 1,591
completed, usable surveys. Our work was conducted in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.
Study Population:
FAA provided data from the Consolidated Personnel Management
Information System (CPMIS) as of June 30, 2001, for all FAA controllers
(Series 2152). Since our primary interest was to estimate for the
controller population most likely to be directly involved in monitoring
the movement of planes, we removed from our study population 2,844
flight service station controllers who give out weather information and
pilot briefings. This left us with a study population consisting of
20,021 air traffic controllers.
Sample Design:
The sample design for this study is a single-stage stratified sample of
FAA employees in the study population. The first four strata consisted
of employees who were likely to be eligible to retire before the end of
2006.[Footnote 35] The fifth stratum consisted only of rehired former
employees, and a final, ’residual“ stratum was defined to ensure
complete coverage of our study population. A total sample of 2,100
employees was selected from the 20,021 employees in our study
population, and we received a total of 1,591 valid responses, for an
overall response rate of 76 percent.[Footnote 36] The following table
summarizes the population size, sample size, number of respondents, and
response rate for each of the sampling strata.
Table 9: Survey Sample Size and Disposition:
Stratum: (1) Non-supervisors at en route centers--Eligible to retire by
2006; Population: 2,079; Sample: 331; Respondents: 247; Response: 0.75.
Stratum: (2) Supervisors at en route centers--Eligible to retire by
2006; Population: 547; Sample: 177; Respondents: 152; Response: 0.86.
Stratum: (3) Non-supervisors at other facilities--Eligible to retire by
2006; Population: 3,937; Sample: 614; Respondents: 473; Response: 0.77.
Stratum: (4) Supervisors at other facilities--Eligible to retire by
2006; Population: 754; Sample: 242; Respondents: 187; Response: 0.77.
Stratum: (5) All rehired former employees; Population: 733; Sample:
336; Respondents: 254; Response: 0.76.
Stratum: (6) Controllers not eligible to retire by 2006; Population:
11,971; Sample: 400; Respondents: 278; Response: 0.70.
Stratum: Total; Population: 20,021; Sample: 2,100; Respondents: 1,591;
Response: 0.76.
Source: GAO:
[End of table]
Survey Development:
In designing the questionnaire, we interviewed FAA officials in Human
Resources at headquarters in Washington, D.C., and at the Oklahoma City
center to identify issues of interest and past work on retirement. We
met with NATCA officials and reviewed their 1999 survey about the
retirement eligibility and intentions of NATCA members in the terminal
and en-route air traffic controller bargaining unit. To further guide
the development of appropriate questions, we reviewed current
literature on retirement issues and studies. We also asked officials at
FAA, NATCA, and the Federal Managers Association to review a draft
version of the survey.
To verify the clarity, length of time of administration, and
suitability of the questions, we also pre-tested the questionnaire with
selected controllers at two towers, one en-route center, and the
Systems Command Center in Herndon, Va. A copy of the Survey of Air
Traffic Controllers Retirement and Attrition Plans can be found in
Appendix VI.
Survey Administration:
We conducted a survey between August 2001 and February 2002, using a
self-administered mail-out survey. We sent a second questionnaire on
October 2, 2001, to all initial nonrespondents in order to encourage a
higher response rate. Following this mailing, we experienced an
extended delay in returns until January 9, 2002, because mail delivery
was halted on account of the anthrax contaminations in Washington, D.C.
Hence, we extended the expected cut-off date until February 12, 2002,
after a stream of returns had tapered off.
By February 12, 2002, we had 1,591 completed, usable surveys for an
overall response rate of 76 percent. Some surveys were eliminated
because they (1) had been returned blank, (2) were duplicates from the
same individual, or (3) came from respondents who had left FAA before
the fielding period ended. We used a contractor to create a database of
survey responses. All data were double keyed during the data entry
process, and GAO staff verified a sample of the resulting data to
ensure accuracy.
Estimates:
Estimates produced in this report are for a target population defined
as air traffic controllers in our study population. A very small
proportion (fewer than 1 percent) of the survey respondents indicated
that they were not classified as Series 2152 air traffic controllers at
the time of the survey. Those respondents are not included in any
estimates derived from survey data in this report; therefore, the final
target population for estimation is 19,880 controllers.
Estimates were formed by weighting the survey responses to account for
effective sampling rates in each stratum. These weights reflect both
the initial sampling rate and the response rate for each stratum. As
with most surveys, our estimation method assumes that nonrespondents
would have answered like the survey respondents.
Sampling Error:
Because we surveyed a sample of air traffic controllers, our results
are estimates of air traffic controller characteristics and thus are
subject to sampling errors that are associated with samples of this
size and type. Our confidence in the precision of the results from this
sample is expressed in 95-percent confidence intervals. The 95-percent
confidence intervals are expected to include the actual results for 95
percent of the samples of this type. We calculated confidence intervals
for our study results using methods that are appropriate for a
stratified probability sample. For the percentages presented in this
report, we are 95-percent confident that the results we would have
obtained had we studied the entire study population are within +/-5 or
fewer percentage points of our results, unless otherwise noted. For
example, our survey estimates that 33 percent of the controllers would
retire earlier if there were increased mandatory overtime. The 95
percent confidence interval for this estimate would be no wider than +/
-5 percent, or from 28 percent to 38 percent. For estimates other than
percentages, 95-percent confidence intervals are +/-10 percent or less
of the value of the estimate, unless otherwise noted.
Nonsampling Error:
In addition to these sampling errors, the practical difficulties in
conducting surveys of this type may introduce other types of errors,
commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For example, questions may
be misinterpreted, the respondents‘ answers may differ from those of
people who did not respond, or errors could be made in keying completed
questionnaires or in the preparation of data files for analysis. We
took several steps in an attempt to reduce such errors.
In addition to the steps taken during the development of the survey and
its administration, we performed computer analyses to identify
inconsistencies and other indicators of errors, and a second
independent analyst reviewed all computer programs.
[End of section]
Appendix VI: GAO Survey of Air Traffic Controllers:
[See PDF for image]
[End of section]
Appendix VII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D. (202) 512-3650
Glen Trochelman (312) 220-7729:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the above, Ruthann Balciunas, William Chatlos, William
Doherty, Colin Fallon, David Hooper, Mitch Karpman, David Lehrer, David
Lichtenfeld, Mark Ramage, Raymond Sendejas, Rebecca Shea, and Amy
Stewart made key contributions to this report.
FOOTNOTES
[1] For this report, ’attrition“ refers to controllers who leave FAA
for a variety of reasons, including retirement, removal for cause,
death, or disability.
[2] Although most controllers are required to stop controlling live
traffic at age 56, they can continue working at FAA in other positions.
[3] A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP
(Washington, D.C.:
Mar. 15, 2002).
[4] All estimates based on GAO‘s survey of air traffic controllers are
subject to sampling error. Unless otherwise noted, 95 percent
confidence intervals for percentage estimates are +/-5 percentage
points or less, and numerical estimates other than percentages have
confidence intervals of +/-10 percent or less the value of the
estimate.
[5] There are 24 en route centers, which include 3 center en route
radar approach facilities--facilities that combine center and TRACON
operations. Terminal facilities can include both a TRACON and a tower,
which FAA categorizes as one facility.
[6] The Office of Personnel Management classifies civilian air traffic
controllers in the FAA as occupational series 2152--civilian air
traffic controllers. In addition to these 20,021 employees, there are
about 2,800 flight service station controllers who do not directly
control or manage air traffic but provide pilot briefing, weather
reports, and emergency services to pilots before and during flights.
[7] There is currently a Senate bill, S. 871, that proposes to increase
CSRS annuity levels. See appendix I for a discussion of the impacts of
this proposal.
[8] Most controllers in FAA are subject to this rule. However,
controllers appointed by the Department of Transportation prior to May
16, 1972, and controllers appointed to the Department of Defense prior
to September 12, 1980, are exempted. In addition, controllers covered
under FERS can work until they accrue 20 years of good time regardless
of age, and CSRS controllers can work past the age of 56 if they have
not qualified for a retirement annuity.
[9] The FAA Academy in Oklahoma City provides management and technical
training to controllers, inspectors, and other FAA personnel.
[10] Over the past 5 years, FAA has hired on average fewer than 10
candidates from the 1992 OPM list each year.
[11] FAA regional officials supplied us with hiring information for
each fiscal year since 1997. Fiscal year 2001 reflects partial year
data.
[12] FAA policy pursuant to Public Law 92-297 prohibits hiring
controllers after they have turned 31 years of age. Exceptions to this
rule include retired military controllers, civilian controllers whom
DOD had hired prior to their 31st birthdays, and re-hired former
controllers, such as those fired in the 1981 strike.
[13] In some of FAA‘s busiest and most complex air traffic control
facilities it can take up to 5 years to become a certified professional
controller.
[14] In this report, ’attrition“ refers to controllers who leave FAA
for a variety of reasons, including retirement, removal for cause,
death, or disability.
[15] FAA estimates that the events of September 11, 2001, will cause
decreases in air traffic through 2003. However, FAA predicts that air
traffic will then rebound and steadily increase, creating a need for
additional air traffic controllers. Future controller staffing levels
will be negotiated between FAA and the union.
[16] Air Traffic Control Facilities: Improving Methods to Determine
Staffing Requirements, National Academy of Sciences, 1997.
[17] Because FAA‘s database does not contain information on the amount
of an employee‘s good time service, to calculate retirement eligibility
under the special provisions we assumed that all of the controllers‘
FAA experience was good time. The results indicate the maximum number
of current controllers who become eligible each year.
[18] Although about 68 percent of current controllers may become
eligible to retire by 2011, FAA‘s workforce at that time will not have
this level of eligibility because some current controllers will retire
before then and FAA will hire new employees.
[19] These estimates also include some minimal amount of nonretirement
attrition--those few controllers who indicated that they would leave
FAA before they retired.
[20] The 95 percent confidence interval for this estimate extends from
1,007 to 1,656 controllers.
[21] The 95 percent confidence interval for this estimate extends from
592 to 984 supervisors.
[22] The 95 percent confidence interval for this estimate extends from
1,279 to 1,728 supervisors.
[23] The 95 percent confidence interval for this estimate extends from
115 to 382 supervisors.
[24] For additional discussion of controller supervisors see Air
Traffic Control: FAA Enhanced the Controller-In-Charge Program, but
More Comprehensive Evaluation Is Needed, GAO-02-55 (Washington, D.C.:
Oct. 2001).
[25] Human Capital: Key Principles from Nine Private Sector
Organizations, GAO/GGD-00-28 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 31, 2000).
[26] A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002).
[27] Base salary figures do not include other military compensation,
such as subsistence and housing allowances; these allowances fluctuate,
depending on numerous factors.
[28] This legislation covers those controllers under the CSRS
retirement system. Another mandatory separation provision was passed in
1986 to cover those controllers who are under the FERS retirement
system Public Law 99-335 (codified at 5 U.S.C. 8425a).
[29] Public Law 92-297 (codified at 5 U.S.C. 8335).
[30] House Report 92-516.
[31] Senate Report 92-774.
[32] Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2002, Public Law 107-67, Sec. 640 (a).
[33] Public Law 92-297 for CSRS, Public Law 99-335 for FERS.
[34] S. 871, the Federal Air Traffic Controllers Annuity Computation
Act of 2001.
[35] We assigned employees to one of the four ’eligible to retire by
2006“ strata based on age and years of service, as reflected in the
CPMIS data files provided by FAA.
[36] Several surveys were received but not valid and are not included
among the 1,591 respondents. This includes surveys that were returned
blank, surveys that were duplicates from the same individual, and
surveys that were returned by respondents who had left FAA before the
fielding period ended.
GAO‘s Mission:
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress,
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO‘s commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO‘s Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as ’Today‘s Reports,“ on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select ’Subscribe to daily E-mail alert for newly
released products“ under the GAO Reports heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office
441 G Street NW,
Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.
General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.
20548:
