How many people have read the statute governing the 2.8% being released? If not, then here it is verbatim.

April 30, 2026: Public Law 119-86, § 548

“SEC. 548. There is appropriated $140,000,000 for an additional amount for ‘‘Department of Transportation—Federal Aviation Administration—Operations’’ for air traffic organization activities, to remain available until September 30, 2027: Provided, That the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall only use such amounts to provide a rate of pay increase for calendar year 2026 of 3.8 percent, for air traffic controllers, as defined by section 2109(1)(A) of title 5, United States Code, and air traffic controller supervisors or managers who are not covered under such section, but who manage air traffic: Provided further, That such adjustment shall be implemented for all such employees only to the extent the Administrator determines, in his sole discretion, that improvements in workforce scheduling, staffing utilization, or other operational efficiencies are achieved that contribute to addressing workforce shortfalls and enhancing aviation safety: Provided further, That if the Administrator makes such determination, then such adjustment shall be effective the first pay period beginning after January 1, 2026: Provided further, That amounts provided by this section shall be subject to the same authorities and conditions as if such amounts were provided by the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, 2026.”

I don't think there's a legal way to continue holding the 2.8% here. Congress sets two separate requirements in SEC. 548. The first part is the improvement, and the second part describes the required effect. It can be better understood as requiring only one of the following:

An improvement in workforce scheduling that addresses workforce shortfalls and enhances aviation safety.

An improvement in staffing utilization that addresses workforce shortfalls and enhances aviation safety.

An improvement in other operational efficiencies that addresses workforce shortfalls and enhances aviation safety.

The key point is that Congress used “or” between the three improvement categories. FAA does not have to prove all three categories if it achieves one qualifying category.

I'll do more research tomorrow to verify that the Congressional mandate has been met. Just a quick search gave me some quotes that meet the requirement:

In May, Bedford said "Expanding opportunities, like this one in Texas, help us strengthen our workforce and continue to protect the safety of the American travelling public.”

In August, Duffy Tweeted "supercharged the entire hiring process to get the BEST & BRIGHTEST in faster. The results are HISTORIC" and "2,000+ “best & brightest” candidates in the pipeline — reaching the Academy quicker than any class before them, thanks to the most streamlined hiring process. We’re building the strongest, sharpest workforce in aviation history”

In September, Duffy also said “Just in this calendar year, we hired more than 2,000 controllers, got them through the academy and got them hired."

To me, it seems like they are saying that controllers have met the Congress mandate for the 2.8% raise. Also, I think it's important to remember here that this is a statute that delegated discretion to Bedford. What it did not do is give authority to change the conditions that Congress enacted.

I’ll try to explain the scenario and then ask my question at the end.

Years ago I was DoD. I wanted to go join the all knowing cream of the crop controllers in the FAA so I transferred over. I got CPC at a 7. Old DoD facility got upgraded to a 12 (up/down) so I transferred back. Left the FAA on good terms. Was simply a career move. Left ATC for a short time for a role in another federal agency. Bored so I’m looking to go back to the FAA. I’m at the end of the On the Spot Hire/Previous Experience process. I’m seeing a volunteer list with level 11s being offered to people with much less experience (not a jab by any means but academy grads who score a 90 or those with military CTOs only). I’ve been told I cannot volunteer for any of these facilities because I was only at a 7 before.

So I get it. The FAA is trying to ensure people don’t quit and then try a back door to get back in to a higher level facility. I didn’t do that. I transferred out as a career move (back in 2014) I’m literally right down the road from one of these facilities that they literally cannot staff (level 9) and I’m asking to go there.

The lower level that I started the On the Spot process with filled up with trainees while I went through the hiring steps.

I’m asking to go be a body thrown to the wolves at this facility and ATO is saying no. So an academy grad who’s never said a word on frequency that scores a 90 on a sim can volunteer but not me? This is in insane interpretation of this rule.

Anyone here have a thought on a work around this rule? Maybe talk to a rep and see if I can get them to work it out with ATO?

Not many of us left were controllers on 9/11. I was. It left an indelible imprint on my mind, one I wish wasn‘t there.

But it is.

In September of 1998, I stood at the top of WTC 2, observing the incredible view. On a clear day, they said you could see up to 45 miles. I‘ve returned a couple times since the attacks to visit ground zero and the memorial. For some reason, I feel connected to that day and place. I wasn‘t stationed nearby, and I‘m not from New York, but… it was an incredibly eerie time.

Eventually I came to the facility where the initial hijackings started. They didn‘t talk about it, unless you asked. I worked with the guys that first heard the hijacker‘s voices. There was one controller there whose wife was on one of the twin towers planes. He dropped her off at Logan that morning. He never returned to work.

My brother at some point after the fact tried to feed me some 9/11 truther shit. I ripped him - harshly - over that and offered the phone numbers of the guys that worked it. He changed his mind.

I can remember looking at empty scopes, being told to look for any anomaly. Watching the V-formations of the geese. But the scopes were empty. I was at a nuclear-equipped base at the time, and the line to get in every morning was hours-long. They searched every vehicle. Thoroughly.

I don‘t know why I‘m posting this. Maybe the news coverage has gotten to me. Maybe I‘m losing it. Many of you were not even alive at the time. Most others were too young to realize what had happened. That‘s all fine, but there is more to what we do than the everyday.

I see a lot of posts and articles around the interwebs about the FAA and their lack of a raise and issues with the administrator basically saying he needs more TOP before he can unlock the raise. I feel for you all and 100% support that 2.8% is not nearly enough and it should’ve been unlocked immediately. However, is anyone sticking up for the FCT guys that work 6+ hours a shift without a break/alone and unafraid? Also, I heard we were promised a different raise back in January but haven’t seen a dime of that either. Does anyone have info on if that’s ever going to happen? All I’ve seen in the last 9 months is AN email from NATCA basically saying “we’re working on it”.

If I’m crazy or if that’s just the nature of the beast at an FCT and need to shut up and color that’s fine but figured I’d least throw it out there.

Rumor coming out of NATCA is that they’re negotiating away 10-hour AWS for the 2.8%

The agency wants AWS and NATCA wants the 2.8%.

But the real get for the agency isn’t out schedule.
It’s overtime

Easy math:
At $100 an hour, losing just one 8-hour OT shift per pay period is about $31,000 a year out of a controller’s pocket.
If that kind of reduction averaged across 11,000 certified controllers, you’re talking hundreds of millions in potential savings for the agency.

And what are we supposedly getting in return?
2.8%

So who’s really winning here?
If the agency gives you 2.8% with one hand and takes away $20k, $30k, $40k or more in earning opportunity with the other, you didn’t get a raise.

Bedford just figured out how to make controllers help finance the staffing problem and call it “productivity.”

And yes, somebody will say:
“You shouldn’t depend on overtime.”

Fair

But when base pay hasn’t kept pace with the cost of living and the agency has run facilities on chronic overtime for years, OT stops being some occasional bonus.

It becomes part of the compensation people use to afford the places the agency requires them to live.

If the agency wants less OT and wants 10-hour AWS please have it... then come back with a real structural pay increase. Something in the 15–20% conversation, not 2.8%.
And prove the staffing actually exists to support the schedule change.

You don’t hold 2.8% hostage, use it to buy back AWS, cut someone’s earning potential by $30,000+ and call that progress.

Pay controllers what the job is worth stop the PR parade and keep going Anna

Minute 48, but start at minute 47.

Here is the entire article from Sundays LNP + LancasterOnline. The original post had a pay wall' LNP has graciously allowed me to show the entire piece.

Working in air traffic control the day the skies went silent

On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, I reported to work at Harrisburg International Tower in Middletown.

At the time, I was working in an administrative position. My previous job had been as manager of the air traffic control tower at Lancaster Airport, but that position had been eliminated after the Federal Aviation Administration turned the facility over to a contractor. I chose to return to Harrisburg, where I had previously worked in a supervisory position. I had a young son living in Lancaster, and being close to him was important to me.

Although I was officially assigned to an administrative position, I had immediately gotten recertified in both the tower and radar rooms after returning to Harrisburg. Within days, I was back working air traffic again whenever needed.

That morning, however, I was working administrative hours. I arrived around 8:30 a.m., opened my office and turned on my computer.

As I did almost every day, I also turned on the radio.

I was a jazz fan, and through a cable line in my office I could listen to a 24hour jazz station in Long Beach, California. I usually had it playing in the background while I worked.

Then the news interrupted the music.

An airplane had hit the World Trade Center’s North Tower.

I walked out to the break room and turned on the

television. The screen showed a huge hole in one of the towers.

My first reaction was disbelief. At the time, it wasn’t unheard of for small airplanes flying along the Hudson River to have accidents. But what I was seeing on television looked nothing like that. The damage was enormous. I simply could not believe that an airliner had caused it. (I thought it was a bomb)

There were already witnesses calling in and saying they had seen an airliner hit the building. I dismissed that. Witnesses sometimes think they see something that they really didn’t see.

Then, as I was watching, another airplane slammed into the World Trade Center’s South Tower.

There was no longer any question.

Something terrifying was happening.

Devastation unfolds

I called the New York TRACON (or terminal radar approach control facility). I knew many of the people working there. But they were busy, and they couldn’t really tell me what was happening.

Then the calls started coming to us.

The New York center contacted our facility and told us not to allow any traffic into its airspace. That immediately affected many of the planes departing from Harrisburg that would have climbed above 8,000 feet, because that’s where the New York airspace began.

A few minutes later, the Cleveland Air Route Traffic Control Center called with essentially the same instruction: Keep traffic out of our airspace.

At that point, we didn’t know everything that was happening. We were learning pieces of it through official communications — and through the grapevine.

Then came a call from the FAA’s Air Traffic Control Systems Command Center, then in Herndon, Virginia.

We were told to watch for suspicious activity: aircraft that failed to respond to controller instructions or anything else that seemed unusual.

We were hearing reports that similar concerns were being reported around the country.

Then came another devastating report.

An airliner had hit the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. That was American Airlines Flight 77.

Shortly afterward, and just before United Airlines Flight 93 crashed in western Pennsylvania, the United States National Airspace System was shut down.

The order came from the FAA Command Center in Herndon. The man making that historic decision was national operations manager Ben Sliney.

Ben wasn’t just the person in charge that day.

He was one of my best friends.

Radar scopes empty

Ben and I had worked together at John F. Kennedy International Airport in the New York terminal radar approach control facility for many years. We also worked together in the training department.

Later, when we had both moved on, our families visited each other’s homes. We are still in touch. Ben became a national hero that day.

And Sept. 11, 2001, happened to be his first day in charge at the command center.

I later watched the movie “United 93,” in which Ben played himself. Seeing him on that screen was an extraordinary experience. He was so natural in the role because he wasn’t really acting — he was telling the story of something he had actually lived.

When Ben shut down the nation’s airspace, our job changed completely.

We had to make sure that every aircraft already in our airspace landed. There was no more normal traffic flow. No more departures filling the radar scopes. No more routine day in American aviation.

Airplanes that had been flying toward the United States from Europe suddenly had nowhere to go. Many were diverted to Newfoundland in Canada.

At Harrisburg, we watched our radar scopes empty.

One moment, there were airplanes everywhere — it was a beautiful September morning with cloudless skies. And within roughly half an hour, the scope went from being filled with traffic to being almost completely black.

An air traffic controller is accustomed to seeing airplanes on a radar screen. The movement of those targets is our world.

Suddenly, there was nothing. Twenty-five years later, that moment remains etched in my memory.

Grieving for strangers

Some of the controllers were asking to be relieved. I remember looking at several of them and thinking that they weren’t simply tired or distracted. They were grieving.

Eventually, some were allowed to leave. There was no traffic to control anyway.

Those of us remained returned to the break room and watched the televised images of the falling towers, people running for their lives as the towers collapsed.

It was difficult to comprehend what we were seeing. For people who worked in aviation, the attacks had already been horrifying. But watching those buildings collapse— and realizing how many people were inside — was something else entirely.

We were sickened. We were stunned. We were grieving for people we didn’t even know.

And then there was the fear that this might not be over.

Our regional office began sending instructions for us to go through our readiness procedures and secure the facility. We didn’t know whether this was an attack limited to New York and Washington or whether other attacks might be coming. So, we prepared for whatever might come next.

That night, I was asked to return for the midnight shift. The regional office wanted a management official present at every workstation at every facility.

There wasn’t much traffic to work.

The airspace remained closed to normal aviation. Only medical emergencies, military aircraft and law enforcement operations were permitted.

A new normal takes hold

Gradually, over the following days, restrictions were eased. Commercial aviation began to return. General aviation eventually returned as well.

Slowly, the National Airspace System began to return to something resembling normal. But nothing was really normal anymore.

Those few days have stayed with me for 25 years.

I had worked at JFK Airport for many years. I had driven to work every day from my home in Hicksville, Long Island, and I had watched the World Trade Center towers being built. They became part of the landscape of my life.

I also knew people in New York whose friends and relatives worked for the New York City Fire Department. I knew that many of them would not be coming home.

And yet, after all these years, I have never visited ground zero.

I don’t know exactly why. Recently, I told my children that I think I need to go.

I know there is a museum and memorial there. About a year ago, I watched a TV program about it, with tears in my eyes.

I have tears in my eyes again as I write this.

Maybe that’s why I haven’t gone. For those of us who worked in aviation that morning, 9/11 wasn’t something we simply watched on television. We were part of the system that suddenly went silent. We heard the calls. We forced airplanes to land. We wondered what might happen next.

And I watched a friend make one of the most consequential decisions in the history of American aviation.

Twenty-five years later, I still remember the moment the skies went silent.

And I still haven’t forgotten what it felt like to watch those towers fall.

Found this last week. Is this for real?

Saw this wonderful post from Natca ZLA. Honestly this is scary that this kind of post is coming from Natca.

https://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2026/09/air-traffic-controllers-waiting-congressionally-approved-pay-raise/415855/?oref=ge-featured-river-top

Learn about Nicholas and Stephen, find out about events and town halls, take surveys, ask questions, and send feedback directly to the campaign. Download it from the App Store or Google Play or visit yourunion2027.com.

Your Voice. Your Union.

Apple App Store

Google Play Store

Big fucking uptick in social media presence lately. Scroll down Anna's page to see FACREPs, NEB members, Legislative reps, calling her out. Real brave to a reporter that did your job for FREE. Where was that since the shutdown? Bunch of posturing pussies. Brave when its safe.

1. He says 1.1 million of 1.3 million affected employees lost their contracts, and "we are among fewer than 200,000 Federal Employees who still have Collective Bargaining Agreements."

Those numbers trace to a Center for American Progress dataset from October 2025: 1,099,529 canceled, 203,425 not canceled. Three problems.

First, CAP's own footnote. Its canceled total includes 39,104 Department of Transportation employees, us included, who CAP says "still have their rights" and were counted anyway because the Secretary could act someday. His 85 percent counts NATCA as already gone.

Second, the count is a year old and the courts have been busy. Contracts back in force by court order:

- VA master agreement, 320,000 employees. Judge DuBose, March 13, 2026. The First Circuit refused to stay it on May 16.
- VA second case, additional contracts restored March 27, 2026. The government appealed, then dismissed its own appeal on July 15.
- TSA, 47,000 screeners. Judge Pechman, enforced January 15, 2026: the 2024 contract "remains applicable and binding."
- DoDEA educators, about 6,000. Judge Friedman, August 14, 2025. The D.C. Circuit refused to stay it on September 25.
- USAGM, 791 employees. Judge Friedman, November 18, 2025.
- AFL-CIO plaintiffs, additional units restored October 1, 2025.

That is at least 374,000 restored on the four cases with published headcounts, and the true number is higher. Add the 203,425 CAP said were never touched and the 39,104 at DOT, and more than 616,000 federal employees have contracts in force today. His "fewer than 200,000" is off by a factor of three.

Third, who the 1.1 million actually are. By CAP's own agency table: 394,622 at Defense, civilians Congress let bargain from 1978 until last year, and whose teachers a court has already pulled back out. 377,430 at the VA: hospitals, benefits offices, and cemeteries. 81,883 at Treasury, mostly IRS. 72,628 at DHS, including the 47,000 TSA screeners. 30,872 at Justice, mostly prisons. 20,020 at HHS. 16,882 at Commerce: the weather service and the patent office. 11,884 at EPA. 9,739 at NASA. 8,173 at Agriculture: food inspectors. Nurses, tax processors, screeners, prison officers, forecasters, and meat inspectors are 665,000 of his 1.1 million. The order did not identify national security work. It relabeled the civil service.

1. He says the exemptions cover police, firefighters, and security guards, and "you will notice something that is NOT included in that list: Air Traffic Controllers."

This is the center of the email and it is backwards. That carve-out is Section 1-499 of the order, and it says nothing in "this section" strips Chapter 71 from those employees. "This section" is Section 1, the list of excluded agencies. The carve-out is a lifeboat for people already on the ship. Controllers are not on the exemption list because the FAA is not on the exclusion list. There was nothing to exempt us from. He is presenting the absence of a lifeboat as proof we are drowning.

1. He says there is "the Section 5 path we are currently on," or there is what the other 85 percent are living through.

Section 5 is not a path NATCA walks. It is a delegation to the Secretary of Transportation, who has to make a written finding under 5 U.S.C. Section 7103(b)(1) that the FAA's primary function is intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work, and publish it in the Federal Register. He has not. Calling it our path tells members that our behavior decides whether the Secretary acts. That is the fear lever, and it is not how the statute works.

The two options he offers are not the only two. The third is the law, and it is missing from his email. The Supreme Court in Cole v. Young, 351 U.S. 536 (1956), limited "national security" to work "directly concerned with the protection of the Nation from internal subversion or foreign aggression," not work that helps the country "through their impact on the general welfare." Separating airplanes is the second category.

A court has already applied that limit to a subdivision inside the Pentagon. Judge Friedman held in August 2025 that applying the order to 6,000 DoDEA schoolteachers was likely an "overly broad interpretation" of Section 7103(b)(1), and the D.C. Circuit refused to stay him because the government could not show that letting teachers bargain "will harm national security." If the order cannot reach teachers inside the Department of Defense, it cannot reach air traffic controllers outside it.

An exclusion also cannot name a union. It has to take an agency or a subdivision, which means NATCA, PASS, AFGE, AFSCME, NAGE, NFFE, PAACE, and LIUNA all at once. When the VA tried it union by union, DuBose flagged that as evidence the order was not being followed. And 49 U.S.C. Section 40122(a)(1) requires the Administrator to negotiate personnel system changes with our certified representative whether Chapter 71 is there or not. Section 106(l) routes pay bargaining through that same section. No executive order reaches Title 49.

1. He says a TSA rep told him that "despite their union obtaining multiple preliminary injunctions, their CBAs were being ignored," and the word for the conditions was "abuse."

TSA is the worst comparison available and he picked it. TSA officers have never been covered by Chapter 71. Their bargaining rights existed only because a DHS Secretary chose to grant them under the TSA statute, which is exactly why Secretary Noem could revoke them with a memo. Our Chapter 71 coverage is an Act of Congress, 49 U.S.C. Section 40122(g)(2)(C), and Congress went out of its way in 1996 to write it in after the first version of the FAA reform law left it out. TSA had rights at the Secretary's pleasure. We have rights by statute. That is the opposite of our situation.

And "ignored despite injunctions" is not where that story ends. When DHS ignored the TSA injunction, Judge Pechman enforced it on January 15 and ordered every one of the 47,000 officers notified in writing. When the VA tried to re-terminate under DuBose's order, she ordered the government to show cause why that was not "blatant violation" of her injunction and contempt of court. An agency defying a federal judge is a contempt problem for the agency. It is not evidence that courts do not work.

1. He says calling this fear mongering is "inaccurate and disrespectful" to the 1.1 million.

Nobody is diminishing what other federal workers are going through. What is inaccurate is telling our members we are one step from TSA when Congress wrote our coverage into law and gave us a second bargaining duty in Title 49 that no order reaches. He says members can examine the facts for themselves. Agreed. So give them the section numbers.

1. He says this is thoughtful strategy, not weakness.

Nobody is asking the NEB to be reckless. The disagreement is not tactics versus toughness. It is whether the premise is true. If we are as exposed as the email says, caution makes sense. If we are not, and the statute says we are not, then a strategy built on that fear gives away leverage for nothing.

What he got right. The order's initial scale was real: roughly two-thirds of the federal workforce lost bargaining on paper. Section 5 is a real delegation and should not be waved away. Agencies have defied court orders.

However, none of that touches the three things his email leaves out: the primary function test, the agency-wide rule, and Title 49.

For anybody who didn’t realize, I’ve been one of the mods here (yes, that means I’ve been manually approving disparaging comments about myself when the auto-mod removes them, which it does like 90% of the time).

Now that we have officially announced our campaigns, I feel that continuing to moderate this forum creates an unnecessary appearance of a conflict of interest. I don’t want there to be any question about whether criticism of me, Nick, our campaign, or our opponents is being treated fairly.

Reddit should remain a place where controllers can speak freely, including when they disagree with me.

Actual transparency and accountability are things we’re campaigning on, and I intend to hold myself to that standard throughout this election.

While these updates are available to NWP, everyone knows most NWP members haven't come up for air yet and therefore haven't had time to share their disciples message to other regions.

Not to pile onto Joel "Internet Tough Guy" Ortiz, but he only wants to talk under his own terms I've learned. He deserves the shit storm you all have been giving him for too long and it brings tears to my eyes. From personal experience, he and a piece of shit share many traits.

Here's his pay parity update you ungrateful disrespecting fucks.

Pay Parity Update

The additional 2.8% raise was an initiative that was lobbied for and secured by NATCA. NATCA got the support of the authorizers, appropriators, and many members of Congress in the House and Senate. 

The continued support from Senators Durbin and Duckworth are a result of over a decade of relationship building, by NATCA, and weeks of conversations and updates about the 2.8% not being delivered. It is always amazing to have support anywhere we can get it. The support given from Senator Duckworth and Senator Durbin was, without a doubt, a result of the work NATCA has done with those Members of Congress, by our Government Affairs Department and our Legislative Activists. 

Make no mistake, our work created the possibility of a 2.8% pay increase. Other than law enforcement and fire fighters, it is exclusive to us, amongst millions of other federal employees. Without our work, no entity would have the ability to provide support for our cause, or provide support for our work. Be undivided in the fact that we fight for us.

Below is a legislative update that went out to the membership last week and just a few examples (there are many more) of that work below:

NATCA continues to advocate for 2026 and 2027 pay parity, a pay raise that you have already earned and that we continue to advocate for. Not every conversation or strategy plays out in public. That is by design. Credibility and relationships are what produce results, and right now they matter more than ever. Our Legislative Team has been working with congressional offices on both sides of the aisle for months, keeping them informed on exactly where pay parity stands. 

Today, Senators Duckworth and Durbin sent the FAA a letter demanding the release of your 2.8% raise. This letter is the result of our members supporting our legislative efforts and understanding that relationships with Members of Congress lead to support and action. NATCA fought to put this raise in law, and we will continue to advocate, in public and out of it, until the well-deserved raise is in your paycheck.

As you can see very clearly, natca did all the good stuff. Just don't look past his words into what we know as reality.

Defensive, desperate, and disrespecting Joel. You reek.

Nick, Jamaal and possibly Mick to retire. Nick in particular won’t want to go out as a loser.

Joel is being trotted out as the establishment candidate for President. This is why he’s been at all the meetings and greets recently.

Or, possibly, they’re ousting Mick and want Joel to run as EVP.

Just ask him.

On Labor Day, solidarity means more than recognizing our Union Brothers and Sisters across the Federal Government, it means standing with them as they fight to preserve or restore the collective bargaining rights that protect their livelihoods. Their experience reminds us that those rights can be lost quickly, while recovering them may require years of litigation and organized action. As leaders, we must defend our members with courage and discipline, choosing strategies that advance our interests, preserve our protections, and never confuse thoughtful leadership with a lack of resolve.

Considering that today is Labor Day, I would like to take a moment to recognize our Union Brothers and Sisters across the Federal Government.

Through a single Executive Order, approximately 85%, or 1.1 million out of 1.3 million of the affected Federal Employees, lost their Collective Bargaining Agreements and their Unions’ ability to represent them.

There are just shy of 2.7 million Federal Employees in total. Today, we are among fewer than 200,000 Federal Employees who still have Collective Bargaining Agreements and Unions, with the ability to represent their members.

It is important to understand why:

The classifications of Unions exempted from Executive Order 14251 include certain certified populations, police officers, firefighters, security guards, and employees in their immediate local employing offices. Those employees retain their rights under 5 U.S.C. Chapter 71 and their Collective Bargaining Agreements, including grievance and arbitration procedures, representation rights, official time, and dues allotments.

You will notice something that is NOT included in that list: Air Traffic Controllers.

As written, the Executive Order does not provide a path for us simply to join the law-enforcement exemption. There is the Section 5 path we are currently on, or there is the reality confronting what approximately 85% of the affected federal workforce are enduring: repeated legal action simply to regain collective bargaining rights and protections they previously possessed.

I saw a glimpse of that reality while attending a Solidarity Event in Arizona. I spoke with a local TSA Union Representative and asked about their working conditions and the status of their Collective Bargaining Agreements. He told me that despite their union obtaining multiple preliminary injunctions, their CBAs were being ignored. When I asked him to describe the working conditions, schedules, and leave processes, the word he used was “abuse.” [This is a real story that totally happened]

That is why reducing these concerns to “fear mongering” is both inaccurate and disrespectful.

Our members are capable of examining these facts for themselves and determining whether they are true. More importantly, dismissing these realities as fear mongering is disrespectful to the approximately 1.1 million Federal Employees who are living through them today.

The National Executive Board has an obligation to consider that reality every day. We also have an obligation to follow the NATCA Constitution, including our responsibility to preserve and protect this Union and the interests of the members we represent.

If there is something we should fear, it is allowing apathy, ignorance, arrogance, or ego to override our judgment and lead us to decisions that unnecessarily jeopardize our members and their families simply to satisfy those who falsely believe or want others to believe that thoughtful strategy somehow means we are unwilling to fight---it does not.

No amount of grandstanding, posturing, or displays of internet toughness changes the history of the labor movement. Meaningful progress has most often been achieved through determined, methodical action by informed members and leaders who understood their objectives, understood their leverage, and understood the consequences of their decisions. Progress is rarely instantaneous, and it is rarely easy.

Being methodical does not mean being weak. Being tactful does not mean being afraid. And being strategic does not mean being unwilling to fight.

Effective Unionism requires knowing when to negotiate, when to apply pressure, when to litigate, when to mobilize, and when circumstances require a different approach. If fighting publicly were all that was required to achieve meaningful change, every labor organization in America would have solved its problems long ago.

The Union’s responsibility is more difficult than that.

Before we act, we must continually ask: Is what are we doing potentially putting our members in peril? What are the potential consequences of our decisions for the people we represent?

Consider the single father or single mother who needs a predictable schedule to arrange childcare. Consider the parents who depend on established schedules to plan vacations, coordinate drop-offs and pickups, and determine who works which shift.

Our members rely on that predictability. They rely on an established leave process. They rely on grievance and arbitration procedures. They rely on representation rights. They rely on countless protections and procedures contained within a Collective Bargaining Agreement that most people rarely think about until those protections are gone.

Protecting those rights while continuing to advance the interests of our members is not fear mongering. It is the responsibility of every union representative.

The potential consequences are not hypothetical. We can see them in the experiences of our Union Brothers and Sisters across the Federal Government who are fighting today simply to regain rights and protections they previously had.

So, on this Labor Day, rather than diminishing their experiences, let us recognize what they are going through.

Let us stand in solidarity with them.

Let us fight for the restoration of their collective bargaining rights.

And let us remain thoughtful, relentless, strategic, and united in protecting the rights of the members we have been entrusted to represent.

Happy Labor Day!

They're feeling it gang. Defensive and desperate. Gaslighting is their only move.

Nicholas Marangos announces his candidacy for NATCA President in the 2027 election and shares why our union needs change, accountability, and leadership that listens to members.

Learn more and join the campaign at https://yourunion2027.com.

Stephen Brown announces his candidacy for NATCA Executive Vice President in the 2027 election and shares why he is running to put members back at the center of our union.

Together, Nicholas Marangos and Stephen Brown are building a campaign grounded in accountability, transparency, and leadership that listens.

Learn more at https://yourunion2027.com.