Statement of Congresswoman Mazie K. Hirono of Hawai‘i
in the U.S. House of Representatives
In Support of the FAA Reauthorization Act Of 2007
September 20, 2007
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2881, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2007. I thank Chairman OBERSTAR and Chairman COSTELLO for their leadership and hard work to bring this complex legislation to the floor.
While there are disagreements on certain issues, the bill that emerged from the committee will serve the greater interests for the American people for years to come. I am truly proud to have been part of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Subcommittee on Aviation in developing this important legislation.
I will address a few of the numerous positive provisions of the bill that warrant mention and support.
One section extends the coverage of OSHA to flight attendants. For all too long--well over 30 years--flight attendants have fought an unsuccessful fight to win basic occupational and health protections available to nearly all other American workers.
Despite a Memorandum of Understanding in 2000 between FAA and the Occupational Health and Safety Administration to rectify this discriminatory application of employment law, flight attendants are still left without any meaningful safety and health protections. Since the FAA has shown no inclination to follow through on the MOU, it is time for Congress to act.
Every day, flight attendants risk exposure to poor air quality, blood-borne viruses including HIV and Hepatitis B, cosmic radiation and noise. They are expected to perform excessive lifting, pushing, pulling and carrying--including carry-on baggage and poorly designed food and beverage carts. Without workplace regulatory protections, flight attendants who are sick and injured have no one to help them. This unacceptable condition threatens not only the health of flight attendants, but the safety of the hundreds of passengers who depend on flight attendants for many in-flight services, not to mention life-saving assistance in times of emergency.
The time has long passed for flight attendants to be denied the same protections that the Federal Government affords millions of other hard-working employees in both the
private and public sector, including its own employees. It is time for Congress to extend OSHA protections to 50,000 American workers who have been denied this basic employment right by their federal regulator, the FAA, which should be leading this effort.
Another important provision that will bring fundamental fairness to the industry is the bill's abolition of the arbitrary 60-year age limit on commercial pilots. Only commercial airline pilots in the U.S. are prohibited from flying after age 60. The International Civil Aviation Authority already allows its pilots to fly to age 65. Many advanced countries, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand have no age limit. Only the U.S., Pakistan, France and Colombia still hold on to this arbitrary disqualification of otherwise competent pilots.
While eliminating this totally subjective and discriminatory restriction on the right to work, the bill provides the necessary safeguards to protect the flying public. No pilot over the age of 60 who is not otherwise capable and qualified will be able to work on the flight deck, just like any other qualified pilot of any age.
The FAA itself agrees that the 60-year old limit should be abolished, but it will take the agency two years to promulgate regulations to change this admittedly archaic rule. Meanwhile, an estimated 4,000 pilots will needlessly be forced to retire unless we pass this bill.
Finally, one of the more contentious provisions of the bill relates to collective bargaining for air traffic controllers. I support the air traffic controllers on this issue. It is a matter of simple fairness that the FAA be compelled to deal fairly with this important group of its employees. There is no fair and equal collective bargaining if one side can walk away from the negotiation table and unilaterally impose its position once an impasse is reached. Fundamental fairness requires that the parties resume negotiations until an agreement is reached and, if the parties cannot agree, mediation should be required. Meanwhile, the pre-impasse terms and conditions of employment should be maintained, as it is in all collective bargaining relationships, until a new collective bargaining agreement is ratified.
Collective bargaining not only protects the rights and benefits of the air traffic controllers, but also protects the lives and safety of the traveling public. When they are adequately compensated and allowed sufficient time for training, rest and recuperation, air traffic controllers would able to do their jobs more effectively.
There is no worse a method to destroy morale and loyalty--and hence effectiveness and performance--of employees than to show such disrespect for them. In a job as critical to the safety of millions of travelers, the effectiveness and professionalism of air traffic controllers must be fostered, not undermined by unfair employment practices that treat them with such undeserved disdain. Giving these important employees bargaining rights equal to the employer is not only the right thing to do, it is the safe thing to do for all Americans.
For the reasons I have stated, I support this comprehensive and major improvement to our nation's aviation system. I urge my colleagues to look at the bill in its entirety and vote to pass this important legislation.
