By David Shepardson
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The Federal Aviation Administration’s overtime costs for air traffic controllers have jumped by more than 300% since 2013 as the agency faces hiring constraints and a misallocated workforce, a report from the National Academies of Sciences released Wednesday said.
The FAA air traffic control workforce in 2024 logged 2.2 million hours of overtime costing $200 million, according to the report, which added that “widespread overtime use may be partly due to inefficient scheduling of the controllers available at facilities.”
Annual overtime is up 308% per air traffic controller, or 126 hours per year since 2013, to 167 hours on average.
The report also said the time controllers spend on position managing air traffic has declined despite a 4% increase in traffic.
A 2024 report from an independent FAA panel assessing the risks of controller fatigue called for mandatory rest periods after raising “serious concerns.”
From 2013 to 2023, the FAA hired only two-thirds of the air traffic controllers called for by its staffing models as staffing fell by 13%, the report said, adding the agency has also been unable to implement a robust shift scheduling software package it acquired in 2012 that may be making the issue worse, the report said.
Controllers in many locations must often work six-day workweeks and mandatory overtime.
The FAA said it will analyze the study and its recommendations and noted it is on track to hire at least 2,000 controllers this year.
The Trump administration wants at least $20 billion to modernize air traffic control, including new airport equipment to prevent near-miss incidents and new incentives to boost air traffic controller hiring and retention, which is 3,500 short of targeted staffing.
By 2024, nearly a third of air traffic control facilities had fallen 10% below staffing targets and about 22% had fallen 15% below, citing hiring constraints in part from two government shutdowns and the COVID-19 pandemic.
The National Academies report said the FAA should “critically evaluate its models and improve them where possible, and return to its practice of adjusting individual staffing targets as needed to reflect facility-specific factors.”
(Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Aurora Ellis)
Comments