Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 660 posts

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#61

Post by randerson »

runako wrote: post #4

Seems like a colossal error to have asked them all to quit. I wonder -- if half of the air traffic controllers took the offer to leave their jobs, do we have a Plan B? The deadline they have been given to decide is Thursday; I have not seen any communication as to whether ATC (and TSA, etc.) will be operational Friday.

ATCs have the upper hand in this negotiation because they're essential and can't be quickly replaced.

If enough ATCs quit that major airports have to be shut down or reduce flights, the airlines (and stock market) will turn against Trump pretty quickly. My guess is the going salary for ATCs is going to increase substantially once they realize they need to lure back those who quit.

I would love to see all ATCs in DC quit, and for others refuse to work there, so that Trump and Musk feel the consequences for their actions directly. Wouldn't it be great if Air Force One was stranded because of this.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#62

Post by pfannkuchen »

csa wrote: post #54
pfannkuchen wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the buyout offer went along with the cancellation of remote work. Like, if you are thinking about quitting because you don’t want to come in, here have an extra incentive to do that and take some time to find another job. ATC already couldn’t work remotely. The only people who would take a deal like this would be people who were thinking about quitting or retiring anyway. I suspect ATC will not be substanti…

> I thought the buyout offer went along with the cancellation of remote work. Your sentiment is a result of their incredibly vague first attempt at messaging. The offer was (or ended up being) a full buyout offer. The “offer” is probably genuine, but it’s not a clean offer, as many edge cases are unclear (e.g., can they terminate you if they accept the offer… currently there is nothing stopping them from doing that,…

Sorry to be unclear, I didn’t mean that only people transitioning from remote to in person can take the buyout. I meant that that is what the deal seemed to be targeting based on the timing, like a release valve for people who would be angry about switching back to in person.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#63

Post by psunavy03 »

sho_hn wrote: post #59
psunavy03 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has always been and will continue to be more safe than driving to the airport. The fact that something extraordinarily safe is potentially less safe is a topic for discussion, but not at the expense of realizing the relative risks of everything else. Prior to the midair at DCA, there had not been a fatal (edit) airliner crash in this country since 2009, and there had not been a midair collision involving an airlin…

There are fatal plane crashes in the US every year - in General Aviation (which often may not talk to ATC at all). Important to make the distinction :-)

I meant airliner crash.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#64

Post by psunavy03 »

iancmceachern wrote: post #41
psunavy03 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has always been and will continue to be more safe than driving to the airport. The fact that something extraordinarily safe is potentially less safe is a topic for discussion, but not at the expense of realizing the relative risks of everything else. Prior to the midair at DCA, there had not been a fatal (edit) airliner crash in this country since 2009, and there had not been a midair collision involving an airlin…

But is it as safe today as it was a year ago today?

Statistically, yes.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#65

Post by csa »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #62
csa wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I thought the buyout offer went along with the cancellation of remote work. Your sentiment is a result of their incredibly vague first attempt at messaging. The offer was (or ended up being) a full buyout offer. The “offer” is probably genuine, but it’s not a clean offer, as many edge cases are unclear (e.g., can they terminate you if they accept the offer… currently there is nothing stopping them from doing that,…

Sorry to be unclear, I didn’t mean that only people transitioning from remote to in person can take the buyout. I meant that that is what the deal seemed to be targeting based on the timing, like a release valve for people who would be angry about switching back to in person.

> I meant that that is what the deal seemed to be targeting based on the timing, like a release valve for people who would be angry about switching back to in person.

That’s a reasonable take.

I don’t think anyone involved is actually on the same page about targeting or intent. It’s a complete shit show.

I have many fed gov friends, and I’m getting some incredible insider takes.

Interestingly, I think that the idea of reducing the federal work force size has a lot of supporters from both sides of the aisle, but this implementation has been haphazard (at best).

A “good” implementation would remove a lot of “build headcount” positions while also adding/filling positions that are still lacking. ATCs and contracting (to name two) fall under the latter.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#66

Post by DonHopkins »

dgfitz wrote: post #18
wry_discontent wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a date when that policy was instituted? I've known a lot of air traffic controllers, and most of them wore glasses.

First result in google for "air traffic controller training" https://www.faa.gov/air-traffic-controller-qualifications Edit: I didn't take a stance on this topic, if you think I did, you are incorrect. I was simply linking the website that outlines the requirements instead of postulating as to what they were.

[flagged]

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#67

Post by RandomBacon »

duxup wrote: post #55
mooreds wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From https://www.faa.gov/jobs/career_fields/aviation_careers : > The approximate median annual wage for air traffic control specialists is $127,805. The salaries for entry-level air traffic control specialists increase as they complete each new training phase.

Seems like reasonable pay for what is a very important job. Wouldn't object to paying much much more.

I'm an Air Traffic Controller and I'm required by the FAA to say these opinions are my own and not necessarily of the FAA.

Some fully-certified air traffic controllers cannot afford to live where they work, not to mention the trainees that have the added stress of training and making less money. At my first facility, to live within 45 minutes of work, my whole paycheck went to rent, thank goodness I had savings from my previous job.

With regards to stress, other controllers have told me about how they arrive at home after work not remembering their drive home, or driving slowly in silence. I remember trying to open my apartment door with my car fob/remote one time wondering why it wasn't working.

And that pay is on par with M-F 9-5 desk jobs that don't kill you mentally and physically. ATC is 24/7 and is notorious for leading to drinking problems, suicide, etc. Entry-level pilots for major airlines make more per hour than us, and we're pay-capped by law and will never make as much as their captains.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#68

Post by duxup »

RandomBacon wrote: post #67
duxup wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like reasonable pay for what is a very important job. Wouldn't object to paying much much more.

I'm an Air Traffic Controller and I'm required by the FAA to say these opinions are my own and not necessarily of the FAA. Some fully-certified air traffic controllers cannot afford to live where they work, not to mention the trainees that have the added stress of training and making less money. At my first facility, to live within 45 minutes of work, my whole paycheck went to rent, thank goodness I had savings from…

Most people don't make that much and live lots of places.

Not sure that "can't afford to" is quite on the nose, but terminology aside I wouldn't object to paying them more.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#69

Post by ranger_danger »

eterm wrote: post #8
Ekaros wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or cut down on flights. You could easily ban private flights until there is enough capacity.

Don't ban. Tax. Never ban. Tax low capacity flights more. That both reduces the number of flights and raises money which can be put toward paying ATCs more and increasing the headcount. You then have a lever available to dial up and down to further reduce flights / raise money. Banning is expensive and increases legislative and judicial burden. Taxing is a much more efficient way to stop people doing things. You have…

I say private flights from the rich should be subsidizing ATC costs... whether that's as a tax or whatever. You could even base it as a percentage of the net worth of the individuals on the flight.

Re: America desperately needs more air traffic controllers

#70

Post by jjk166 »

psunavy03 wrote: post #64
iancmceachern wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it as safe today as it was a year ago today?

Statistically, yes.

Based on what data? In 2024 there were 0 domestic airline collisions in 16 million flights, in 2025 there was 1 in 1.3 million.
Post reply on HN