Kathryn's Report: http://www.kathrynsreport.com
Legislation to remove the nation's air traffic control from the federal government is the right prescription for an antiquated system. But that doesn't require union sweeteners to make the medicine go down.
The Aviation Innovation, Reform and Reauthorization Act separates the air traffic control system from the Federal Aviation Administration, creating a federally chartered nonprofit corporation. In other countries such as Canada, these entities have effectively embraced changes in technologies that enhance safety.
But those advantages shouldn't be diluted by buying union appeasement, which sets a bad precedent, says James Sherk, The Heritage Foundation's labor policy expert.
Among concerns is a provision that allows for binding arbitration. Under existing law, the FAA can impose a contract if union negotiations reach an impasse, which the Bush administration did in 2006. But binding arbitration too often directly benefits government unions at a steep cost to the public.
Additionally, the new nonprofit agency would be released from the federal salary cap ($185,100). And a “quasi-private corporation would mean the president no longer could intervene to end a strike by firing the strikers,” Mr. Sherk points out.
These issues should be fixed by Congress in finalizing the legislation. And considering that the median air traffic controller earns $123,000 annually, there's no reason to artificially sweeten the union's pot.
Original article can be found here: http://triblive.com/opinion/editorials