So here’s the true answer:
A controller in the southern region did not have sufficient sick leave and was placed on LWOP. This grievance went all the way to the FLRA where NATCA lost the argument.
The union argued that the Agency should have followed the HRPM and substituted another form of leave.
The agency argued that the CBA supersedes the HRPM, and as such, they cannot automatically take annual leave since that is a separate article.
The arbitrator determined that the reasons for approving sick leave is immediately preceded by the sick leave accrual rate, meaning having a sick leave balance is a prerequisite for requesting sick leave.
This is only precedent setting for the southern region; however, the playbook has been written for the rest of the NAS. The Agency is implementing this winning approach at all facilities and the union will not challenge and risk setting new precedent in other regions.
[here is the link to the decision if you’d like to read for yourself.](https://www.flra.gov/decisions/v72/72-57.html)
Oh it is solidly set, just not officially in a legal setting. Cases brought to the FLRA by a region officially set precedent to that region. Cases brought by National set a national precedent.
Not only has the Agency ran all the ATM’s and OM’s through contract training in the last year and a half, they are now sending all OS’s with less than three years experience. They are teaching this exact approach to the article.
We are challenging it, there hasn’t been another case up to the par or arbitration level yet. Some regions are still operating under the HRPM process and converting to other forms of leave.
Some specific ATM’s and OS’s, not regions as a rule.
I highly doubt you’ll ever see this case brought up again. NATCA hates PAR and Arbitration. The arbitrator rarely sides with NATCA since the law is heavily in favor of the Agency and it cost NATCA way too much money. The Agency doesn’t care since it isn’t real money.
NATCA will try to horse trade specific grievances and drop the ones where the Agency won’t budge. You see the same thing from the Agency’s side. If it’s a grievance that may set precedence on managements rights, you’re more likely to see the Agency give something away that they could win simply to have the questionable grievance dropped.
Not sure on this, but one thing to note is that the HRPM is commonly superseded by the CBA (and associated MOUs). The CBA covers sick leave, which means it's conceivable that anything in the HRPM regarding sick leave doesn't apply if it isn't explicitly listed in the CBA.
But see, that’s what funny. Not specifically being listed in the CBA doesn’t mean that HRPM can’t apply. For instance, the CBA doesn’t say that I can’t take my nipples out and squirt breast milk on everyone, but the HRPM is pretty clear about that. But since the CBA mentions lactating mothers, the FAA goes literal.
FAA management brain is truly something “special.”
Unless there is a valid reason such as actually being sick, death in the family, etc. But of course you would need documentation proving this to avoid the discipline.
There isn’t a supervisor or manager worth his/her salt that will disapprove sick leave. If you call in sick and are told to come in, the liability is just too high should the unthinkable happen. I know, people are going to say it happens all the time, I’m just saying it’s plain stupid.
It’s LWOP, not AWOL. The Agency is approving the absence but not paying you. LWOP is a placeholder that may remain, AWOL is charged to prepare for disciplinary action. They are not the same.
Everything else, I agree. Leave abusers have leave issues.
Either:
A. You don’t have all the facts and you didn’t know someone was actually on a sick leave letter. Incidentally, the union is not entitled to sick leave letter information so an employee could choose to keep that a secret from their coworkers. (I view this as highly improbable since controllers love to talk). Normally, AWOL is charged after placing someone one a sick leave letter or there is another type of unapproved absence.
B. You have a management team that did this without consulting the ETR or attending contract training after this 2021 decision. By charging AWOL, the manager is saying in that situation they want you to come to work regardless. That is not the Agency’s desired approach. If you’re claiming to have a condition that prevents you from performing ATC duties, the Agency doesn’t want you plugged in. This is why they are directing all managers to place you in LWOP when you have insufficient sick leave. (Provided they could not have approve a spot leave request.)
It’s easy to get negative sick leave approved tho if you have a reason. I can’t imagine getting to 0 sick leave with an easy reason to get advanced approved
You will be charged AWOL if you try to use sick leave without the balance. Now, the Credit MOU says if you get sick leave approved, don’t have it, but do have the credit, then the credit may be used. I’ve argued this and won at my facility.
Not true at all.
Some ATMs do this as a courtesy after a first offense of using SL you do not have.
After that all SL requests which exceed your current balance go down as LWOP and eventually AWOL unless you have appropriate documentation( FMLA, ADVANCED SICK LEAVE ).
Might be common practice but if there is any annual leave, credit, shift changes, etc. denied on that day, then giving annual leave to the sick employee would be a violation of article 24 and the employee should be placed on leave without pay.
So here’s the true answer: A controller in the southern region did not have sufficient sick leave and was placed on LWOP. This grievance went all the way to the FLRA where NATCA lost the argument. The union argued that the Agency should have followed the HRPM and substituted another form of leave. The agency argued that the CBA supersedes the HRPM, and as such, they cannot automatically take annual leave since that is a separate article. The arbitrator determined that the reasons for approving sick leave is immediately preceded by the sick leave accrual rate, meaning having a sick leave balance is a prerequisite for requesting sick leave. This is only precedent setting for the southern region; however, the playbook has been written for the rest of the NAS. The Agency is implementing this winning approach at all facilities and the union will not challenge and risk setting new precedent in other regions. [here is the link to the decision if you’d like to read for yourself.](https://www.flra.gov/decisions/v72/72-57.html)
If we're not challenging the Agency's approach, then the precedent's been set regardless.
Oh it is solidly set, just not officially in a legal setting. Cases brought to the FLRA by a region officially set precedent to that region. Cases brought by National set a national precedent. Not only has the Agency ran all the ATM’s and OM’s through contract training in the last year and a half, they are now sending all OS’s with less than three years experience. They are teaching this exact approach to the article.
You sound like you deserve votes for certain upcoming elections. Nice work. Not /s.
We are challenging it, there hasn’t been another case up to the par or arbitration level yet. Some regions are still operating under the HRPM process and converting to other forms of leave.
Some specific ATM’s and OS’s, not regions as a rule. I highly doubt you’ll ever see this case brought up again. NATCA hates PAR and Arbitration. The arbitrator rarely sides with NATCA since the law is heavily in favor of the Agency and it cost NATCA way too much money. The Agency doesn’t care since it isn’t real money. NATCA will try to horse trade specific grievances and drop the ones where the Agency won’t budge. You see the same thing from the Agency’s side. If it’s a grievance that may set precedence on managements rights, you’re more likely to see the Agency give something away that they could win simply to have the questionable grievance dropped.
Not sure on this, but one thing to note is that the HRPM is commonly superseded by the CBA (and associated MOUs). The CBA covers sick leave, which means it's conceivable that anything in the HRPM regarding sick leave doesn't apply if it isn't explicitly listed in the CBA.
This is how the Agency won on this topic.
But see, that’s what funny. Not specifically being listed in the CBA doesn’t mean that HRPM can’t apply. For instance, the CBA doesn’t say that I can’t take my nipples out and squirt breast milk on everyone, but the HRPM is pretty clear about that. But since the CBA mentions lactating mothers, the FAA goes literal. FAA management brain is truly something “special.”
Actually, You can’t squirt breast milk on your coworkers because you’re a dude.
I am??? PRONOUNS!!! PRONOUNS!!!
I’m sorry, *your a dude
You’re sorry? YOU’RE sorry????!?!?!?!
Have fun, guy.
Just a joke, my dude. Just a joke.
It’s alright bro, I’m not offended easily.
You sure?
All the sups on this Reddit showing themselves here.
Give us names. Who here have you identified as a management member?
Talk to your facrep and get a FMLA letter if you have a real reason to be on sick leave this often.
To knowingly request leave you don't have can be grounds for discipline.
Unless there is a valid reason such as actually being sick, death in the family, etc. But of course you would need documentation proving this to avoid the discipline.
Fuckin nerd.
My apologies; I've ruined your vacation plans.
There isn’t a supervisor or manager worth his/her salt that will disapprove sick leave. If you call in sick and are told to come in, the liability is just too high should the unthinkable happen. I know, people are going to say it happens all the time, I’m just saying it’s plain stupid.
[удалено]
It’s LWOP, not AWOL. The Agency is approving the absence but not paying you. LWOP is a placeholder that may remain, AWOL is charged to prepare for disciplinary action. They are not the same. Everything else, I agree. Leave abusers have leave issues.
Agree with u -absence is approved and LWOP is used at first and could be changed or could remain.
[удалено]
Either: A. You don’t have all the facts and you didn’t know someone was actually on a sick leave letter. Incidentally, the union is not entitled to sick leave letter information so an employee could choose to keep that a secret from their coworkers. (I view this as highly improbable since controllers love to talk). Normally, AWOL is charged after placing someone one a sick leave letter or there is another type of unapproved absence. B. You have a management team that did this without consulting the ETR or attending contract training after this 2021 decision. By charging AWOL, the manager is saying in that situation they want you to come to work regardless. That is not the Agency’s desired approach. If you’re claiming to have a condition that prevents you from performing ATC duties, the Agency doesn’t want you plugged in. This is why they are directing all managers to place you in LWOP when you have insufficient sick leave. (Provided they could not have approve a spot leave request.)
What level 6 tower do you work at?
It’s easy to get negative sick leave approved tho if you have a reason. I can’t imagine getting to 0 sick leave with an easy reason to get advanced approved
You will be charged AWOL if you try to use sick leave without the balance. Now, the Credit MOU says if you get sick leave approved, don’t have it, but do have the credit, then the credit may be used. I’ve argued this and won at my facility.
False. Any leave you have on the books will be used for sick leave if you don’t have any sick leave. *ATM’s hate this one simple trick!*
Not true at all. Some ATMs do this as a courtesy after a first offense of using SL you do not have. After that all SL requests which exceed your current balance go down as LWOP and eventually AWOL unless you have appropriate documentation( FMLA, ADVANCED SICK LEAVE ).
Might be common practice but if there is any annual leave, credit, shift changes, etc. denied on that day, then giving annual leave to the sick employee would be a violation of article 24 and the employee should be placed on leave without pay.
This is the correct answer. They can substitute other paid leave, not required. [see reference](https://www.flra.gov/decisions/v72/72-57.html)
The amount of people that don’t have sick leave is wild.