In the crime world as well as in most air traffic control facilities, nicknames are the language of the masses. In Sopranos-land it's "Jimmy Bag Of Donuts" and Frank "The Face" Gazpatcho and Tony "Two Fingers" Tropicano. In air traffic control it's Comrade and Peaches and Bird Ankles and Flounder and Pork Chop and Cheetopicker and MoFo and Bugger (and I could go on for 15,000 names but you get the idea.)
FAA Headquarters has a few nicknames, too, whether it's "Biker" Bobby or Ricky "The Douche" or "Sissy Joe." And who can forget "Bullethead" and the Gel-Man? But a new nickname is whispering along the springtime breeze, sure to bring a smile to the face of anyone fond of such cleverly coined but always well-earned monikers. It's Marion "Sack Of Hammers" Blakey, so named because that's what her agency resembles in the latest "Best Places To Work In The Federal Government" survey.
The survey, "the most comprehensive and authoritative rating of employee engagement in the federal government," is produced by the Partnership for Public Service and American University’s Institute for the Study of Public Policy Implementation (ISPPI).
What this survey says about the FAA senior management can be summed up in one word: CATASTROPHE. Yet in spite of---or since they are so damned thin skinned maybe because of---my expostulations they continue their reign of terror, reflected accurately in the following survey scores:
Overall index score? 204th out of 222 federal agencies ranked.
Strategic management? 209th out of 222.
And the "horses-head-in-the-bed" index, the one that should scare you and keep you up at night, the one that fairly shouts "Fire her?" It's "EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP," where Sack Of Hammers led the FAA to 214th out of 222. Hell, even Alberto Gonzales managed a better score than that, and Al's got one foot out the door and the other one on a banana peel (only he can't remember that detail...along with 72 others.)
On the bright side, when it came to leadership the FAA beat out the "Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration." The FAA also beat out the "Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration." Yeah, FAA Leadership Team! We're better than hog-sloppers, drug addicts and loonies!!! (And frankly...we only beat out the hog-sloppers by three-tenths of a point...)
I'm sure right now the FAA management team is cinching up their WalMart ties and casing the joint, looking for a few long tables in the cafeteria to have their congratulatory lunch on. Cake and punch and time off for everyone at Headquarters! New cheap plastic Chinese wings for the troops in the field!
I mean, really, people...this is 1981 all over again. They're firing the wrong half of the workforce. The FAA fired air traffic controllers for not checking a box on a form (and had to take the employees back after botching that one.) They canned others on THEIR LAST probationary day (but will be taking at least one of them I know back shortly to beat the court order...after botching that one.) A recent correspondent of mine won her unlawful removal case after fighting it for TEN YEARS. She is going to bank the ten years of back paid salary, annual and sick leave and call it a career. You see...they fired her in her tenth year, and with the free ten years at home she's done twenty and is now eligible to retire.
And yet we get stuck keeping around this incompetent leadership team---a team that rushed the FAA to the bottom of the federal barrel---we're stuck with them like they're some kind of STD we can't get rid of???
Please...somebody pass ol' Johnny The Bull a hypo full of penicillin.
Uh, not to rain on your parade, but my employer is actually tied at 204, with the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. The FAA was placed below the Office of Special Education because their rating actually improved from last year, whereas the FAA's employee satisfaction declined. (Imagine that!) So don't break out the party hats yet Marion, the FAA is number 205. The only surprise is we are not absolutely last.
Posted by: Todd Wilhelm | April 23, 2007 at 03:07 PM
Anyone know what the FAA's ranking was prior to the current administration? Just curious.
Thanks.
Posted by: tthomp | April 23, 2007 at 03:28 PM
This is the third survey. The prior years were 2003 and 2005. I didn't see 2003 data for the FAA but in 2005 the FAA was ranked 50th from bottom at 58.8%. They're now 17th from bottom at 50.3% and 5 of the agencies scoring lower didn't exist in 2005. Then again, a full 25 agencies that didn't exist in 2005 are ranked higher than the FAA in 2007.
DOT has gone down, as well.
2003 - Tie 13th of 28
2005 - 22nd of 30
2007 - 27th of 30
Posted by: helicopterdude | April 23, 2007 at 04:13 PM
Hey guys, (generic for you gals too) The faa mismanagegment team is doing exactly what maid marion and rusty chewbaca wanted. They wanted to drive this ship into the ground, run it so hard it throws a rod, burn it up, trash it, crash it and then dash it. Only when the faa is not only last, but down for the count will their mission be completed. It's all part of the plan, steal it, wreck it, then collect insurance payment. In this case it's called privatization.
Posted by: Retired_Yea | April 23, 2007 at 06:03 PM
I thought the "sack of hammers" nickname was referring to something else. Like..."She looks like she got hit with a...."
Posted by: Irish1 | April 23, 2007 at 06:05 PM
"I thought the "sack of hammers" nickname was referring to something else. Like..."She looks like she got hit with a...."
Posted by: Irish1 | April 23, 2007 at 06:05 PM "
I wish you would not compliment her on her looks....she does not look that good.
Posted by: TunicaHelper | April 23, 2007 at 09:26 PM
One of the problems with this Agency is accountability. They said it themselves! Yet the only people being held accountable are the controllers. Managers make huge mistakes costing the taxpayers millions of dollars and they are promoted or moved. Our administrator loses $5 billion dollars and it gets ignored. Business model? CEO's? What a bunch of malarkey. If any manager made a blunder costing a company millions he would be removed and any CEO who lost $5 billion dollars would be unemployed while an investigation was going on. I'm not implying she took it but she sure as hell is responsible for it. Yet she is prancing around like she is doing such wonderful things. SHE LOST $5 BILLION DOLLARS!!! Pathetic place this government has become.
Posted by: Disgruntled Employee | April 23, 2007 at 10:51 PM
We need to encourage every facility to exploit the employee survey results to the local media and tell them in Layman Terms, either Ms Gibson is a BOLD FACED LIAR or "She just doesn't have a CLUE!!!!!"
Posted by: E. Alexander | April 23, 2007 at 11:21 PM
I thought she was both?
Posted by: FX | April 24, 2007 at 05:43 AM
One needs to understand that the Bush-Blakey FAA does not care about employee morale or our well being, and they certainly don't care about our opinions. Any negative results from some pesky survey can be spun away as a few disgruntled employees ultimately, carping about a "contract", or the lack thereof in this case. Ventris Gibson has it all figured out, just get those male controllers to take off their dresses, conduct a few "focus groups" (just a guess here, but I probably won't be asked to participate)and just like magic, poof, the problem is solved. Ventris said it herself, things are already getting better. Why bother actually trying to solve a problem (or in this case preventing it, which would have been much easier) when you can gin up the FAA propaganda machine and wordsmith all of the problems away.
Posted by: nwprlc | April 25, 2007 at 09:23 AM
Really perfect!2
Posted by: glory | July 01, 2007 at 08:48 PM
Pretty nice site, wants to see much more on it!
Posted by: poiu | July 17, 2007 at 04:17 PM
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
Posted by: van | August 29, 2007 at 07:20 PM
excellent texture.i
Posted by: bek | September 29, 2007 at 01:52 AM
Yes! so hold.i
Posted by: Kim | September 30, 2007 at 03:58 AM
Nice site!
Posted by: fox | October 03, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Nice looking site.a
Posted by: sara | October 07, 2007 at 12:33 PM