Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:55:44 -0500
From: Gayle Surrette <davinci at chesapeake.net>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Odd events
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

I agree with Ted on this.  I had friends who were ATC at the
time and the strike wasn't really about wages though that was
part of it. It was about safety. The ATC's were being 'forced'
to work longer shifts which takes away from alertness especially
with the out-of-date equipment. Another item was they wanted
the equipment updated.  The refresh rates on some screens was
such that planes could exchange places during the update so
that the ATCs could lose track of them when stacking for landings.

I think Reagan pushed the wage angle to gather sympathy for
his actions and the union really didn't make a strong enough
case for themselves.

Gayle

Ted White wrote:
> ronkean at juno.com wrote:
> [...]
>> The air traffic controllers, who were already highly paid, were
>> arguably trying to extort even higher wages, and Reagan's response
>> was probably the right one.
>
> I strongly disagree.  Reagan's desire (which he fulfilled) was to *break
> the union*.  There are few jobs in this country with more responsibility
> and stress, and the air controllers were also (as they still are)
> hampered by obsolete and barely functional equipment.  What's it worth,
> salary-wise, to keep the controllers sane and functioning optimally?
> Consider the alternative.
>
> --Ted White
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president,
or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."    Theodore Roosevelt
*
Gayle Surrette             Brandywine, MD
davinci at chesapeake.net     home email
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++