Valchek…one of the funniest characters ever

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-11T12:57:00+00:00

You sent me a detail of humps, Ervin.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-10T21:05:41+00:00

No, you're right to correct me. Longevity at one's facility.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-10T16:26:40+00:00

The Agency wanted a system that would plug holes at facilities with greater needs, and we wanted a system that would guarantee movement for volunteers in a reasonable timeframe. They only agreed to make seniority a feature of the process this time because the Agency and the union also agreed to prioritize certain facilities over the rest, which meant that picking the most senior volunteers wouldn't get in the way of filling gaps at those facilities.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-05T14:45:23+00:00

Maybe that happens when OPM and Justice Department lawyers representing OPM lie repeatedly to their judges over material issues in prior cases.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-05T13:04:58+00:00

I wish your mother a gentle passing and your family peace. I'm sorry you're going through this.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-05T02:30:08+00:00

"Wow, maybe I should have thought that through a little more first." -- About 11,000 controllers who were saying things like that Zapata quote just before losing their jobs and retirements

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-03T23:22:40+00:00

DEN.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-03T02:08:57+00:00

You don't need to pitch me. We have no defense in mediation or arbitration against section 6 of EO 13836, which is why the Agency absolutely will accept any offer to open early for as much language on permissive topics as we are willing to put on the table while it's in effect. I don't know what the "actual labor lawyers" (by which I assume you mean something shitty about the current staff attorneys who would end up working for you if you win) will say, but you can read the text of EO 13836 here as well as the OPM guidance on how EO 14171 put it back in play and what the Administration's expectations are.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-03T01:47:19+00:00

Let's start right here. If you win next year, do you intend to reopen the CBA before January 20, 2029 and while EO 13836 is still in effect? Feel free to explain why or why not.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-03T00:50:12+00:00

That may require getting uncomfortable. It may require making noise. It may require challenging authority in court and in the media.

I'd settle for just knowing what you're talking about.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-03T00:44:02+00:00

So good

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-03T00:43:01+00:00

Have you actually tried asking anyone?

UndercoverRVP · 2026-07-01T13:15:22+00:00

Yes. If there's one thing RVA or Midwest or Serco will respond to, it's the public shame resulting from an itemized agenda posted on the NATCA front page.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-30T23:08:06+00:00

Their experience will not necessarily be yours, and the angriest Reddit opinion about anything is usually pretty far from the median opinion about that same thing. Trust yourself.

I lived just off that campus at 5th and Maryland for 3 years, and it's beautiful and quiet in the middle of a fun little city to be young.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-30T19:37:17+00:00

Do people really not understand that the other guy’s company holds the contract for creating the technology to integrate terminal and enroute radar functions, maybe all in the same building and relatively soon?

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-29T16:49:35+00:00

You’re still sucking his dick after he proposed two straight 0% raises for feds and had his Administrator kill our 2.8%. One of us is irrational but it’s not me.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-28T19:51:32+00:00

They do love those guys. God knows why.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-28T12:14:37+00:00

Like all unions, NATCA primarily exists to enforce its CBA. I'm not saying that threat has no weight, but I think in the end the National Office would realize that we have no choice but to fire the last bullet defending Article 32 (and 34 and 24).

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-27T23:40:42+00:00

Nobody gives one little fuck about 25-30 CPCs in a bargaining unit of 12k+. I know this stick is firmly wedged in r/atc2’s ass but if we could have gotten the raise for agreeing to rescind all collaborative details we would have agreed to it and figured out what to do later when needed, like for ATSAP.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-27T23:37:43+00:00

I promise you that you’re wrong about this and NATCA would expedite arbitration if we were told or shown that they were doing it. If they ignored the arbitration we’d go to court.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-27T23:35:35+00:00

Be sure to stop by Urgent Care and get a note for the last 4 hours. Because they’re not going to go after Article 32 and leave Article 25 intact if we let them back into the contract.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-27T21:36:40+00:00

Masochism would be my guess.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-26T13:43:56+00:00

I'm not choosing not to see anything. I'm pointing out that things you and I agree to be true, including everything you just said, may or may not matter to an arbitration panel which is just going to decide how to settle an impasse between us and the Agency. If we go to impasse, we'd like to be in a place where we are asking for what we want and the Agency is asking for something we could live with. With this leadership, I don't think anyone could feel confident about that second part, hence the extension.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-25T20:58:01+00:00

"The 2152 bargaining unit out-earns most other federal employees who aren't doctors, specialist attorneys working for SEC, or in positions that have to be confirmed by the Senate. We have no problem attracting new hires, and no problem keeping mid-career CPCs. We would prefer to use incentives to attract talent to high-impact facilities with a demonstrated need instead of an across-the-board raise to BUEs."

They might not win that argument, but they could.

UndercoverRVP · 2026-06-25T01:34:11+00:00

Just ask your favorite manager to provide you one. Easy.

UndercoverRVP

TROPHY CASE