Question

The PATCO Syndrome: Coming at the beginning of the Reagan‐era conservative ascendancy, the 1981 PATCO strike is often cited as the defining labor struggle of our time. The air traffic controllers’ strike and its brutal aftermath foreshadowed an era of union‐busting and decline that continues to this day. From 23 percent of U.S. workers in unions before the strike, the share of the organized workforce declined to just 12 percent today. Though other factors were at work— globalization, automation, outsourcing—the reinvigorated anti‐union stance of employers after the PATCO strike was crucial to labor’s decline. Yet 30 years later, many details about the union and its strike have been forgotten. PATCO was a fairly young union. In the wake of President Kennedy’s 1962 executive order authorizing federal employees to unionize, the air traffic controllers joined other federal workers in a wave of organizing. Controllers were dissatisfied with inadequate wages and equipment, excessive overtime, and stress. They were frustrated with the workplace culture of the military‐influenced Federal Aviation Administration. But this work environment also forged intense solidarity among the workers, who developed tremendous pride in their training and skills in a crucial job. They organized several associations and unions, finally founding the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization in 1968. Unionization came with significant restrictions, however, including no right to strike or bargain over wages or benefits. On‐the‐Job Actions In the ensuing years, PATCO staged a series of successful work‐to‐rule slow‐downs and sick‐outs, winning contract improvements and creatively gaining pay increases despite the ban on wage negotiations. It’s fascinating to see the membership develop confidence and militancy through grassroots, rank‐and‐file organizing across a far‐flung network of airport job sites. By 1976, the union had attained an impressive 85 percent membership among the 16,000 controllers, the highest union density in the federal workforce. When the 1981 negotiations began, PATCO was largely controlled by its militant wing, known within the union as the “choirboys.” The union demanded significant wage increases and threatened to strike. Once the illegal strike began, Reagan declared a 48 hour return‐to‐work ultimatum. PATCO was initially unfazed, as leaders and members expected the chaos in the flight control system to force a more favorable settlement. But the controllers had grossly miscalculated the ability of the FAA to keep the system running without them, by relying on scabs, supervisors, and borrowed military controllers. Air traffic, while initially crippled, was gradually restored over time. Reagan ultimately fired more than 11,000 strikers. Some will consider the PATCO strike an example of union courage and militancy; others will see arrogance and overreach.

Where Was the AFL‐CIO? Where was the rest of the labor movement? The AFL‐CIO offered rhetorical support but no substantive solidarity. The Machinists and Pilots unions, whose workers were closest on the job to the controllers, offered no support either.   The pilots’ position is most troubling, because they could have refused to fly in a less safe air traffic control system. Such a move undoubtedly would have helped PATCO win, but the pilots viewed the strike as a threat to their jobs and declined to help. The isolation of PATCO was complete. Banned from the industry, strikers were forced to search for other work. PATCO lost its certification for violating the no‐strike rule. The struggle turned toward getting the strikers’ jobs back, but Reagan was intransigent and refused.   The number of large‐scale strikes dropped dramatically in PATCO’s wake, as the severe recession of the early 1980s set in and declining union militancy and increasing concessions became the norm. Though employers had long taken anti‐union stands, the 1980s and 1990s saw a resurgence of union‐ busting, with crushed strikes at Phelps‐Dodge, Greyhound, Hormel, International Paper, the Decatur battles, and the Detroit News/Free Press. Does the labor movement still suffer from “PATCO syndrome”? The air traffic controllers were a gutsy group, and PATCO’s early years show what’s possible when a strong union acts boldly. Yet their disastrous strike has left a lasting negative impact.  

CASE STUDY QUESTIONS;

1. The PATCO Strike had significant impact on labor relations and the status of unions. What is your opinion, belief, and perspective of former air traffic controllers who were terminated from employment with the FAA for participating in the PATCO strike and of the decision to term them?

2. What impact do you believe this had on unions as a whole?

Answer 1

1.
Answer:- In my opinion terminating air traffic controllers from employment with the FAA for participating in the PATCO strike was very unfair. Each employee has the right to raise their voice and demand for their rights. And the reason for this strike was to increase their wages. There could be another way to solve the issue where both the parties could be in win-win positions however terminating them for participating in the strike was very unfair decisions.

2.
Answer:- PATCO strike is an example of a strong and courageous union. It shows the struggle and efforts of the union for their rights. Their sacrifices are still remembered today by the labor community and the public. This strike made the government think about the changes that are required in the labor aspect. Post this many unions started making laws where rights to employees were granted to replace strikes. Thus, even though the PATCO strike was not successful it has created huge impact on labor union and their rights.

**Hi student, if you find this helpful kindly, give a thumbs up, that will be very grateful, also if you have any doubt you can ask me in the comment section.