2003 Employee Attitude Survey: 

Analysis of Employee Comments

S. Janine King2

Crystal E. Cruz1

Dan G. Jack2

Suzanne Thomas

Carla A. Hackworth1

1

Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

Federal Aviation Administration

Oklahoma City, OK 73125

2

OMNI Corporation

P.O. BOX 25082

Oklahoma City, OK 73125

June 2005

Final Report

DOT/FAA/AM-05/13

Office of Aerospace Medicine

Washington, DC 20591
NOTICE

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of

the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of

information exchange. The United States Government

assumes no liability for the contents thereof.
i

Technical Report Documentation Page 

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 

DOT/FAA/AM-2005/13 

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date 

June 2005 2003 Employee Attitude Survey Analysis of Employee Comments 

6. Performing Organization Code 

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. 

S. Janine King,2 Crystal E. Cruz,1 Dan G. Jack,2 Suzanne Thomas,2 and 

Carla A. Hackworth1

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) 1

FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute 

P.O. Box 25082 

Oklahoma City, OK 73125 

2

OMNI Corporation 

P. O. Box 25082 

Oklahoma City, OK 73125 

11. Contract or Grant No. 

12. Sponsoring Agency name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 

Office of Aerospace Medicine 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Ave., S. W. 

Washington, DC 20591 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 

15. Supplemental Notes 

Work was accomplished under approved subtask AM-B-03-HRR-522.

16. Abstract 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) distributed 48,900 Employee Attitude Surveys to its employees in 

September 2003; of those, 22,720 completed surveys were returned. About 38% (8,606) of the returned 

surveys contained typed or hand-written comments. A 33% random sample of commented surveys (2,860 

surveys) across FAA lines of business and major organizations was selected for transcription and content coding. 

Of the total codes assigned, 12,703 (91%) were considered negative in tone, and 1,193 (9%) were positive. 

Comment categories (i.e., combined topics) and topics were chosen for presentation by rank-ordering codes for 

positive and negative comment categories/topics. The top 50% of positive comments included four 

categories/topics: confidence in leadership, satisfaction with job overall, commitment/loyalty to the FAA, and 

confidence in nonsupervisory employees. The top 50% of negative comments included 20 categories/topics. Of 

these, the categories/topics representing the highest proportion of negative comments were: confidence in 

leadership; morale; privatization/future contracting; understaffing; FAA policies, practices, and programs; 

encouraging hard work; management concern for employees; promotion equity; comments about the survey; 

and trust. The high number of negative comments included in this report should not compel the reader to 

conclude that employees were extremely dissatisfied overall. In fact, the quantitative reports of response 

frequencies to the closed-ended items on the survey revealed a variety of areas where most employees were 

satisfied. For a balanced view of employee feedback, consider the results from the quantitative reports along 

with employee comments from the survey. 

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement 

Employee Surveys, Employee Comments, Survey Feedback Document is available to the public through the 

Defense Technical Information Center, Ft. Belvior, 

VA 22060; and the National Technical Information 

Service, Springfield, VA 22161

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price 

Unclassified Unclassified 40 

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized 

iii

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

METHOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

 Comment Transcription. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

 Coding Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

 Quantitative Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Coding Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

 Summary Frequencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

 Part I. Indicators of Satisfaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

 Part II. Management and Work Environment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

 Part III. Other Issues of Concern. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

 Part IV. Comparisons Across Organizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

APPENDIX A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1

APPENDIX B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1

APPENDIX C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1

APPENDIX D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1

1

2003 Employee Attitude Survey Analysis of Employee Comments

INTRODUCTION

In September 2003, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) administered the Employee Attitude Survey 

(EAS) to a census of its employees. The survey included 

129 items and a page for respondents to provide additional 

comments. A percentage of the additional comments 

were content coded. This report presents the content 

analysis for the FAA overall and examples of respondent 

comments. 

Before describing the specifics of the content analysis, 

a few words of caution are warranted. While most comments were negative, there is a substantial base of literature 

that explains why this could be expected. According to 

Pratto and John (1991), people have a tendency to attend 

to negative information (automatic vigilance). In addition, negative information affects cognitive processing 

differently than non-negative information (Dijksterhuis 

& Aarts, 2003; Rozin & Royzman, 2001). Furthermore, 

research has shown that negative behavior is assigned 

greater weight when forming impressions (Fiske, 1980; 

Hamilton & Zanna, 1972). In an attempt to discern the 

saliency and power of negative events, Baumiester, Bratslavsky, Finkenauer, and Vohs (2001) posited that it was 

evolutionarily beneficial in a precarious environment for 

negative information to exert a greater influence. Extending this to corporate culture or socially varied organizations 

in general (e.g., the FAA), issues such as accountability, 

performance bonuses, and cliques are havens for the 

influence of negative information or events. 

One possible avenue for employees to share this information is through an employee survey. One reason 

that employees provide feedback is to inform people 

about what is happening in their workplace. Given 

the influential nature of negative information and our 

inclination to notice such information, it would seem 

vital to share this information in an attempt to solicit 

help, cause changes, or to simply be heard—survival in 

an organizational environment. In addition to attending 

more to negative information, people are also more likely 

to try to find the reasons behind negative events than to 

understand why something positive occurred (Roese & 

Olson, 1997). Similarly, people are more likely to act to 

reduce unhappiness than they are to make someone even 

happier (Rozin & Royzman, 2001). Hence, action plans 

are generally designed to target negative areas rather than 

to accentuate or maintain positive areas. 

Given the cognitive and social parameters around 

negative information, it is not surprising that the majority 

of comments provided on the 2003 EAS were negative. 

This fact should not compel the reader to conclude that 

employees were extremely dissatisfied overall. In fact, 

the quantitative reports of response frequencies to the 

closed-ended items on the survey revealed several areas 

where most employees were satisfied. For a balanced view 

of employee feedback, the quantitative reports should 

be considered in addition to employee comments from 

the survey (Hackworth, Cruz, Goldman, Jack, King, & 

Twohig, 2004).

Method

Sample

The EAS 2003 was mailed to 48,900 FAA employees 

on active pay status as of July 2003. The survey was administered by using 10 unique surveys. The core items 

(129) of each survey were identical; however, each survey 

had a unique set of organizational demographics, which 

were specific to each Line of Business (LOB) or major 

organization (MO) of the FAA. Respondents were invited 

to provide written comments at the end of the survey.

Returned surveys were sorted and processed by LOB 

or MO and further sorted by the presence or absence of 

comments. Surveys were then scanned into the database 

in sets of 10, maintaining the LOB/MO separation. Sets 

of surveys containing comments were numbered as they 

were scanned. The set numbers were used to draw a 33% 

random sample within each LOB or MO.

Procedure

Comment Transcription

Respondents were informed that a portion of the written comments would be transcribed, content coded, and 

quantified, and that summary results would be presented 

to FAA management. Survey recipients were also informed 

that identifying information would be removed; but that 

if the content of their comment could be used to identify them, confidentiality could not be assured. Finally, 

respondents were advised that transcribed comments are 

subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and 

as such, could be made public.

The random selection of comments was transcribed to 

enhance readability, remove profanity, eliminate the possible identification of a respondent through handwriting, 
2

and to remove identifying information. Information was 

removed if it identified the respondent, the respondent’s 

region, division, or facility, or any other FAA employee. 

Removed information was replaced with a generic term 

for the information within brackets (e.g., [profanity], 

[region], or [facility]). Sanitation of the comments was 

necessary to protect survey respondent anonymity. 

Coding Procedure

Coding Scheme Development. The comment coding 

scheme used for the 2000 EAS (King, Broach, Jack, & 

Thompson, 2001) served as the foundation from which 

to build the coding scheme for the 2003 EAS comments. 

Areas of interest new to the agency since 2000 were incorporated into the coding scheme, and areas that were not 

utilized fully in 2000 were eliminated. In addition, topics 

that were not reflected in the content of the 2003 survey 

were added to the coding scheme based on the comments 

provided by employees. The 2003 comment codes were 

organized into the following three major areas based on 

the reporting structure of the 2003 quantitative data.

Part I. Indicators of Satisfaction. Comments about 

topics related to overall quality of work life and job 

satisfaction, satisfaction with compensation, and organizational commitment.

Part II. Management and Work Environment. Comments about topics related to performance management, 

performance focus, workplace resources, leadership, 

communication, conflict management, and Model Work 

Environment (MWE).

Part III. Other Issues of Concern. Comments about 

areas of concern for survey respondents that were not 

specifically addressed by the EAS 2003 and that do not 

fit into construct areas included in the survey (e.g., FAA 

policies and practices, management and union relations, 

and comments about the survey).

Comments were coded by topic and affectivity (i.e., 

positive or negative). Each topic area was assigned a unique 

code. In addition, positive comments were assigned the 

letter “P” to the end of the code to distinguish positive 

and negative comment content. Overall, there were 237 

negative codes and 215 positive codes. The final coding 

scheme is presented in Appendix A.

Comments were coded to the finest possible level. 

For example, respondent comments about trust were 

coded as to whether the comments regarded trust in the 

FAA in general, trust in a level of management (i.e., the 

Administrator or top management, regional, facility/division, unspecified level of management, or supervisors), 

or trust in nonsupervisory employees. 

Coder Training. A coding team was trained using the 

coding scheme and sets of returned surveys containing 

comments. First, the team was provided with examples of 

comments representing each code topic, and these were 

discussed in detail. Second, the team coded 5 sets of 10 

commented surveys as a group and discussed the assigned 

codes. To ensure inter-coder consistency, team members 

were provided with 5 additional sets of 10 commented 

surveys to code individually. Then the team reconciled 

discrepancies as a group by discussing team members’ 

codes and arrived at a consensus about which codes were 

appropriate for each comment. This process was repeated 

twice, such that each team member individually coded 

150 surveys. Codes for all 150 surveys were discussed 

and reconciled as a group. 

Comment Coding. A random sample of sets of 10 surveys 

containing respondent comments within each LOB or 

MO was selected for transcription and content coding.

The randomly selected sets were randomly assigned to 

two coders from the team. Coders independently read and 

coded the comments in their assigned sets by underlining sections of comments deemed codable and writing 

the code above the underlined section. A team of three 

lead coders with coding experience from previous EAS 

2000 administration discussed the code assignments and 

resolved discrepancies. 

Coding Examples. Employee comments varied greatly 

in length and complexity. A comment may have consisted of a very short sentence fragment or a number of 

pages of complex paragraphs. Given the length of some 

respondents’ comments, the number of codes used for 

a single survey’s comments ranged from 1 to 32 with a 

mean of 4.4 codes per comment-coded survey. The code 

for any given topic was assigned to a survey only once, 

regardless of how many times the employee may have 

mentioned that topic. For example, a survey might have 

contained four separate negative comments relating to 

morale; however, that survey would be assigned only one 

code representing a negative comment about morale. An 

example of a coded comment follows: 

—We have low staffing; no training, poor communications 

on changes in policies, morale is down FAA wide.

This example received four codes. The first part of the 

statement, “We have low staffing,” was assigned the code 

for understaffed (code 343). The second part, “no training,” was coded 381 for negative training opportunity 

timeliness/availability. The third code assigned was a 4 

representing negative general downward communication. 

When the respondent did not specify a level of management, a general code was assigned. If the respondent had 

referenced a specific level of management, for example, 

the Administrator or top or senior management, this 

section of the comment would have been assigned 

a code of 4.1. The number following the decimal 
3

represents the level of management. When no management level was specified, the comment was assigned a 

general code (i.e., no decimal). Finally, the last section of 

the example comment was coded negative morale, 120. 

If any portion of the comment had contained a positive 

statement, a “P” would have been added to the end of 

the code to represent a positive statement. For example, 

if respondents commented that they were provided with 

ample training opportunities, their statement would have 

been coded 381P.

Quantitative Analysis

The final step in the process was the quantitative 

analysis of the coded comments. The comments were 

analyzed at the survey level by counting the number of 

surveys with comments for each topic code. This provided 

the finest grain analysis for each topic code. In addition, 

topic codes were grouped into categories where appropriate (i.e., where multiple topics were related to a single 

general category) for the purpose of determining the 

overall frequency of positive and negative categories. Some 

topics did not fit into broader categories and remained 

stand-alone comment topics. Surveys containing more 

than one topic code within a single category were counted 

only once toward that particular category so as not to 

inflate the category count. Therefore, within a category, 

an individual may have contributed to numerous topic 

code counts, but would only contribute to the overall 

category count once. As with a “mark all that apply” 

question, topic code counts will not necessarily add up 

to the category count. 

Comment categories and topics were rank-ordered 

by frequency. This was done separately for positive and 

negative comment categories/topics. The top 50% of 

both positive and negative categories or single topics 

were selected for presentation in this document. This 

resulted in 4 positive comment categories/topics and 20 

negative comment categories/topics. The frequencies 

for the individual topics within a category will also be 

presented. For the purpose of organizing the information presented in this report, frequencies representing 

categories are presented inside parentheses in Tables 2-13. 

In addition, each category and the topics that make up 

each category were assigned unique letter identifiers that 

are presented as subscripts to the frequency values. For 

example, the privatization/future contracting category 

shown in Table 4 was assigned the subscript letter “a.” 

This category’s topics included: general comments about 

privatization/future contracting, privatization/contracting impact on job security, impact on retirement, and 

impact on earnings. Each topic was also assigned the 

subscript letter “a.” 

RESULTS

Coding Sample

Of the 48,900 surveys distributed, FAA employees 

returned 22,873 surveys. A small number of employees 

(153) returned blank or shredded surveys, leaving 22,720 

completed surveys. About 38% (8,606) of the returned 

surveys (including blanks) contained typed or hand-written comments. Blank surveys were processed and scanned 

into the database to ensure a more accurate account of 

returned surveys and to provide commented blank surveys 

an opportunity to be included in the random sample for 

transcription and coding.

In some cases, commented surveys included attachments such as E-mail messages, bulletins, and other 

supporting documentation. In all cases, commented 

surveys selected for transcription were transcribed verbatim, omitting profanity and identifying information; 

however, attachments were not transcribed or coded as 

part of the comment. Additionally, a small number of 

comments requested some action such as forwarding of 

comments to another party or a request to contact the 

respondent to discuss comments. These requests could 

not be met due to the anonymous nature of the survey 

and comments.

A 33% random sample of commented surveys (2,860 

surveys) across LOBs and MOs, or about 13% of all returned surveys, was selected for transcription and content 

coding. Table 1 presents the number of surveys returned, 

the number of commented surveys, and the number of 

surveys selected for transcription and coding for each LOB 

or MO and for the FAA overall. Table 1 also shows that 

AAT, the FAA’s largest organization, provided comments 

at a higher rate than the other organizations, with 49% of 

their returned surveys containing comments. Although 

this report summarizes the results of the comment content 

coding analysis for the FAA overall, it is important to note 

that the size of the AAT organization, combined with the 

greater number of commented surveys provided by AAT 

respondents, influenced the results of the analysis. 

Summary Frequencies

As mentioned previously, each survey may have had 1 to 

32 codes assigned, based on the content of the comment. 

A code for any given topic was assigned only once per 

survey. For the FAA overall, 2,860 surveys were contentcoded, yielding 13,896 individual codes. Of the total codes 

assigned, 12,703 (91%) were considered negative, and 

1,193 (9%) were positive. These rates were identical to 

those of the 2000 survey. A summary count of all assigned 

codes by topic is presented in Appendix B. 
4

This report focuses on the topic and category (i.e., 

grouped topic) codes with the highest frequency of occurrence for both the negative and positive comments. 

The most frequently coded positive comment categories/ 

topics are presented in Table 2, followed by the most 

frequently coded negative comment categories/topics 

in Table 3. These represented the top 50% positive and 

top 50% negative comment categories/topics. Each of 

the top positive and negative comment categories/topics 

is discussed and examples of comments provided. In addition, within an area of interest represented by at least 

one top positive or negative category/topic, some topics 

not among the top 50% are also presented. Frequencies 

representing categories (grouped topics) in the tables are 

presented in parentheses. In addition, both the frequencies 

for the category and the topics that make up the category 

are presented with a subscript letter identifier. Additional 

examples of the top positive and negative comments for 

the FAA overall are provided in Appendices C and D, 

respectively. 

Part I. Indicators of Satisfaction

Indicators of satisfaction included the areas of quality 

of work life, compensation satisfaction, and organizational 

commitment. Each of the three areas contained categories/

topics with sufficient numbers to be included in either 

the top 50% of positive or negative comments for the 

FAA overall. In fact, 2 of the top 4 positive and 4 of the 

top 20 negative categories/topics were from these areas. 

These categories/topics, as well as some related topics, are 

presented and discussed in the following section.

Quality of Work Life

Quality of work life (QOWL) included comments 

regarding overall job satisfaction, morale, work site, work 

schedules, job security, privatization, and promotions. The 

frequency of positively and negatively coded comments 

for QOWL categories/topics are presented in Table 4. 

Overall job satisfaction represented a top positive comment category/topic (178 surveys). Job satisfaction has 

been described as a multifaceted construct (Smith, 1992). 

Not surprisingly, respondents provided comments about 

topics that were not directly addressed by the survey but 

that, nonetheless, could be considered topics affecting 

overall job satisfaction and overall quality of work life, 

such as privatization. Comments regarding morale (561 

surveys), privatization (489 surveys), and promotion selection equity (252 surveys) were top negative comment 

categories/topics. 

Satisfaction with job overall. Job satisfaction was the 

second-largest positive category/topic for the FAA overall 

(178 surveys). Factors related to job satisfaction have 

included organizational commitment (Ting, 1996) and 

individual difference variables such as one’s general outlook 

on life (Heller, Judge, & Watson, 2002). One example 

of a positive job satisfaction comment was:

—I love my job and feel privileged to work with the other 

individuals in my office.

Indeed, when asked about job satisfaction on the EAS 

2003, 71% of respondents indicated that they were somewhat or very satisfied with their job. This represents an 

increase over the EAS administrations in 1995, 1997, and 

2000 and is the second-highest level of job satisfaction in 

the history of the EAS, second only to 73% in 1993. In 

addition, 71% positive job satisfaction is slightly higher 

than other comparison surveys of government employees. 

For example, the 2002 Federal Human Capital Survey 

(U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 2002) reported 

68% satisfaction and the 2000 Merit Principals Survey 

(U.S. Merit System Protection Board, 2003) reported 

67% satisfaction.

Morale. Morale was the second most frequent negative 

category/topic overall (561 surveys). Some respondents 

linked low morale with other coding topics while others 

simply stated that morale was low as in the following 

examples:

—However our morale is affected by mistrust of management – all the way up to the president that is making very 

visible effort to privatize my job.

—Morale in our branch is desperately low.

Other respondents used terms such as demoralized or 

disheartened. Because these terms refer to the weakening 

or loss of morale, these comments were coded as negative 

statements about morale. The following are representative 

of comments coded as negative morale:

—To say that I am completely demoralized is a gross 

understatement.

—I’ve known many talented hard working people who are 

totally disheartened and fatalistic about the FAA’s future.

Privatization/future contracting. There were 489 surveys 

with negative comments regarding privatization and 

future contracting, making it the third highest negative 

category/topic overall. Within this category, the most 

common negative comments were those regarding general 

comments about privatization and future contracting (471 

surveys) and those regarding the impact of privatization 

and future contracting on job security (184 surveys). 

Other comments included in this category referenced the 

impact of privatization on retirement (22 surveys) and 

earnings (23 surveys). While the issue of privatization was 
5

not included on the survey, it was a topic of concern for 

at least two of the largest organizations within the FAA, 

Air Traffic (AAT) and Airway Facilities (AAF). The following example is a negative comment about contracting 

and privatization in general:

—I believe the contracting out of jobs and privatization 

of the air traffic system is the most critical issue facing the 

FAA. I do not believe that contracting out jobs or privatization is the solution to the FAA’s problems.

The following example is representative of a negative 

comment about the impact of privatization and future 

contracting on job security:

—Job security — I presently feel my future is threatened 

by the push to contract out.

Promotion Selection Equity. There were 252 surveys 

with negative comments regarding the perceived equity 

of selections for promotions. Comments within this 

topic contained three major themes including selections 

or promotions based on the “buddy system” or who you 

know, the “quota system” or affirmative action, and an 

ineffective qualifications rating system. The following 

examples are representative of the themes of comments 

within this topic:

—It is obvious that people are promoted not for their skills 

or competence, but because of affirmative action quotas or 

the “good ol’ boy” system.

—The FAA needs to start promoting the “best” candidate 

for promotion. The selection criteria are never made public 

nor is it easily discerned. The entire selection process needs to 

be revised and “published” so that everyone is on an equal 

playing field. Too many hidden agendas.

Promotion Opportunities. Another area within promotions that received a high number of comments was the 

lack of promotion opportunities within the FAA (143 

surveys), although it missed being included in the top 

50% of negative comments for the FAA overall. One 

respondent wrote:

—We have little or no promotion opportunities.

Compensation Satisfaction 

Satisfaction with compensation included topics related 

to satisfaction with pay and pay system; perceived equity 

of pay and benefits both within the agency and compared 

with outside the agency; and satisfaction with benefits 

such as insurance, leave, and retirement. Comments regarding satisfaction with pay system (223 surveys) were 

in the top 50% of negative comments (Table 5); other 

areas of compensation are not discussed.

Satisfaction with Pay System (Core Compensation). 

Respondents made specific comments regarding several 

areas directly affected by the Core Compensation (CC) 

pay system (223 surveys). Those areas included general 

satisfaction with the CC pay system: impact on earnings, 

retirement, and subjectivity or fairness of the CC pay 

increases and promotions. The majority of comments 

in this category fell into the general satisfaction with the 

CC pay system topic (136 surveys) and the subjectivity of 

pay increases and promotions topic (119 surveys). When 

asked about pay system satisfaction on the EAS, 37% of 

CC respondents indicated that they were somewhat or 

very satisfied with their pay system compared with 56% 

of general schedule respondents. Examples of respondent 

comments for both topics follow: 

—Although core comp is theoretically superior, in actuality 

it does not work well.

—SCI’s are stupid, inequitable, and unfairly administered 

from supervisor to supervisor.

Organizational Commitment 

Organizational commitment included topics such as 

commitment/loyalty to the FAA, abuse of leave, general 

comments about the FAA, intent to leave, and high turnover. Comments regarding commitment and loyalty to 

the FAA (131 surveys) were in the top 50% of positive 

comments (Table 6). There were no top negative comments under organizational commitment.

Committed/loyal to the FAA. Commitment and loyalty 

to the FAA (131 surveys) was the third-largest positive 

category/topic overall. While there were many positive 

comments about commitment or loyalty to the FAA, 

there were also 119 surveys with negative comments about 

commitment or loyalty. On the EAS, 79% of employees 

indicated that they felt loyalty to the FAA to at least a 

moderate extent, while 90% reported that they cared 

about the fate of the FAA at least to a moderate extent. 

The following are examples of positive and negative organizational commitment comments, respectively:

—I am loyal to the FAA and proud to be a contributing 

member.

—I feel no loyalty to the agency at this time.

General comments about the FAA. Some respondents 

made comments about the FAA in general that expressed 

an opinion about the agency but were not specific enough 

to be coded into any other topic or category. With 164 

respondents making negative general comments about 

the FAA, this topic narrowly missed being included in 
6

the top 50% of negative comments. The following is 

representative of a general negative comment:

—The FAA is a dysfunctional organization that is in serious need of a major overhaul in its structure and culture.

Part II. Management and Work Environment

Management and work environment included the 

areas of performance management, performance focus, 

workplace resources, leadership, communication, conflict 

management, and model work environment (MWE). 

Thirteen of the top 20 negative and two of the top four 

positive comment categories/topics were from these areas. 

There were no top positive or negative comment categories 

or topics, however, within the areas of performance focus 

or conflict management, so these comments will not be 

discussed in this report. 

Performance Management 

Performance management included the areas of clarity 

of performance expectations, encouraging hard work, recognition and rewards, training, accountability, and dealing 

with poor performers. Of these, encouraging hard work 

(268 surveys), accountability (213 surveys), and dealing 

with poor performers (224 surveys) were included in the 

top 50% of negative comments (Table 7).

Encouraging hard work. This category received negative 

comments on 268 surveys. The vast majority was generic 

to the FAA (203 surveys) and was typically of two general 

types. First, respondents indicated that the FAA does not 

provide any incentives for doing a good job or for going beyond the minimum expected to be successful. In 

fact, some employees commented that the FAA actually 

discourages innovative behavior and hard work. Second, 

employees made statements that the agency provided no 

verbal recognition or praise for a job well done. The following are examples of each type of comment:

—After 25+ years of service, I have learned that extra 

effort is discounted, discouraged, and rejected unless it has 

a political payoff. 

—They [FAA management] don’t know how to distribute 

‘good job’ ‘pats on the back’ to our workforce. It’s not all 

about the pay.

Accountability. This category received negative comments on 213 surveys. The majority regarded the FAA 

in general (82 surveys), followed by references to management in general (55 surveys), and nonsupervisory 

employees (40 surveys). When asked about accountability 

on the EAS 2003, the same percentage of employees 

(38%) agreed or strongly agreed that managers and 

supervisors, as well as nonsupervisory employees, are 

held accountable for achieving important agency goals. 

The following examples are representative of these three 

coding topics:

—The FAA needs to prioritize, the work force needs to be 

reduced and held accountable for their work ethics.

—It would be a great improvement if there were some level 

of accountability for management, and fair and equitable 

treatment from them, but this is not the case now. 

—I am not held accountable for how well or bad I do 

the job.

Dealing with poor performers. This category received 

negative comments on 224 surveys, with the majority 

of comments referencing the FAA in general (128 surveys). In addition, a fairly large number of respondents 

indicated that some unspecified level of management was 

unable to deal with poor performers (43 surveys). On the 

EAS, 21% of employees agreed or strongly agreed that 

corrective actions are taken to deal with nonsupervisory 

employees who perform poorly, while only 16% agreed 

or strongly agreed that corrective actions are taken to deal 

with managers and supervisors. Examples of comments 

for these two topics are provided:

—Incompetence and poor performance seems to be tolerated vs. dealing with it.

—The poor performers are never confronted by mgmt. 

The good performers are asked to do more.

Workplace Resources

Workplace resources included several general topics 

related to resource availability including personnel staffing, 

workgroup knowledge, adequacy of time for job, budget 

or financial resources, supplies and general resources, and 

equipment. All of these areas included one or more top 

positive or negative comment categories or topics. Table 

8 shows that within workplace resources, understaffed 

(356 surveys), workload too heavy (171 survey), material resources (203 surveys), and equipment (203 surveys) were in the top 50% of negative comments, while 

confidence in nonsupervisory employees’ knowledge, 

skills, and abilities (94 surveys) was in the top 50% of 

positive comments. 

Understaffed. The majority of negative comments 

about staffing were centered on personnel understaffing 

(356 surveys). One theme found in this topic was that 

employees’ perception of the FAA’s philosophy of “do 

more with less” is not working. Other themes found in 
7

comments regarding being understaffed included the 

sentiment that employees are overworked and simply 

do not have enough time to get their work done or that 

overtime requirements have become a way of life. Examples 

of the types of comments coded as understaffed follow: 

—For years we have been asked to do more with less 

and today is no different. Today, however, we take it to 

new magnitudes. Staffing, or lack of, is something we, as 

an agency, must come to grips with. Our job quality is now 

being questioned.

—The workforce is tired; we are continuously understaffed 

with increased volume and time restrictions/reroutes in place 

everyday. Overtime is a routine necessity that still does not 

provide the bodies needed.

FAA ability to hire/attract new employees. Another 

staffing topic that narrowly missed the list of top negative comments was the FAA’s ability to attract or hire 

new employees (162 surveys). Respondent comments 

closely linked this topic to understaffing. Employees 

commented that the FAA’s continual hiring freezes and 

inability to backfill positions lost through attrition are 

major contributors to understaffing. Additionally, some 

respondents were concerned about the FAA’s ability to 

compete for qualified applicants. Still others stated that 

the agency’s hiring practices are too cumbersome to be 

effective. Examples of the types of comments coded in 

this topic follow: 

—Many other branches and divisions in the regional office also desperately need help, but are in the same position 

due to the ‘hiring freeze’.

—Due to the cost of living in [Region], we cannot attract 

highly qualified bidders when job openings are bid.

—The hiring process is very ineffective. Very difficult 

to hire the best person for the job and the process takes far 

too long.

Workload too heavy. Many respondents (171 surveys) indicated that they did not have sufficient time 

to get their jobs done or that their workloads were 

too heavy. Respondents often linked this topic to 

the lack of available personnel (understaffed). The 

following examples are representative of comments 

coded in this topic: 

—There is too much work, not enough time in the day or 

week to complete it, and not enough staff resources.

—Everyone complaining about not having the time to 

do a quality job. I have found and others agree, that it is 

getting more and more difficult to get the necessary help 

from others because they have no time.

Confidence in nonsupervisory employees’ KSAs. Comments regarding nonsupervisory employees’ knowledge, 

skills, and abilities (KSAs) ranked as the fourth-most 

positively coded comment for the FAA overall (94 surveys). 

It should be noted, however, that this topic also had a 

larger number of negative comments (129 surveys), but 

because of the preponderance of negative comments, did 

not reach the cut-off for the top negative comment list. 

An example of a positive comment about nonsupervisory 

employees’ KSAs follows:

—The Federal Aviation Administration has some of the 

most professional, maintenance-oriented individuals I have 

had the privilege to work with.

Material resources. The category of material resources 

received negative comments on 203 surveys. The most 

common negative topic was budget and financial resources (164 surveys). The budget and financial resources 

topic included comments about budget considerations, 

organizational funding, and fiscal spending restrictions. 

The following examples are representative of the types 

of comments included in this topic:

—Too many budget cuts within the FAA/GOV.

—FAA funding is too low.

Equipment. Within the equipment category (203 surveys), the most common negative topic was equipment 

quality and maintenance (162 surveys) and included 

comments related to antiquated technology and the lack 

of needed maintenance. The following examples are representative of respondent comments for this topic:

—Equipment: would be nice to have up-to-date computers 

with software that works well.

—Many pieces of equipment at my facility are broken or 

being held together with some wire and a prayer.

Leadership

Leadership included the areas of confidence in management, general fairness, disciplinary fairness, management 

concern for employees, and trust. Table 9 demonstrates 

that confidence in management represented both the 

most frequent positive (249 surveys) and most frequent 

negative (1,033 surveys) comment category overall. The 

general fairness (207 surveys), management concern 

for employees (255 surveys), and trust (232 surveys) 

categories were also included in the top 50% of negative 

comments.
8

Confidence in management and supervisors. Confidence in the KSAs and leadership style/abilities of FAA 

managers and supervisors garnered the largest number 

of both positive (249 surveys) and negative comments 

(1,033 surveys). Many employees provided comments 

about confidence in the FAA’s leadership that referenced 

a specific level of management. The levels of management 

included top management (Administrator and heads of 

LOBs), regional management, facility or division management, management in general (no level specified), 

and supervisors. Most comments referenced local or 

top management, rather than the intermediate level of 

regional management. 

Among positive comments in this category, the most 

frequent comments were for the facility/division management level (72 surveys) and supervisors (71 surveys). 

Comments about local management included technical 

expertise, support for employees, and general leadership 

style. The following are examples of positive comments 

about local management and supervisors:

—We love our manager to death. She does everything 

possible to keep us up to date on things going on that would 

affect both our work environment and our personal lives 

i.e. retirement or pay changes.

—My immediate supervisor does not fit the overall mold 

for management. He balances the needs of the organization with the needs of his employees. His knowledge and 

expertise contribute greatly to the enjoyable work environment for me.

The negative comments in this category were more 

evenly split across management levels with the exception 

of regional management, which had the lowest frequency 

of both positive (5 surveys) and negative comments (81 

surveys). This was followed by comments regarding supervisors (216 surveys), top management (271 surveys), 

facility/division management (301 surveys), and management with no level specified (323 surveys). 

Negative comments about supervisors reflected a lack 

of confidence in their technical expertise and general 

leadership style. The following comments are typical 

of the types of negative comments made by employees 

about their supervisors:

—Supervisors are inexperienced and unprofessional. 

Some supervisors do not have the KSAs and experience to 

be supervising.

—My work group is paralyzed by an ineffective supervisor 

who could be justifiably accused of malfeasance.

Many of the negative comments about top management (the administrator and heads of LOBs) referenced 

the continual reorganizations and the inability of senior 

management to follow through with specific plans. Respondents also cited a lack of true leadership from top 

management and a lack of awareness of the responsibilities of their subordinate organizations. The following are 

examples of comments representative of this topic:

—The ready, fire, aim, mentality of senior leadership must 

change. Be leaders, make a decision and stick to it! The FAA 

seems to change just for the sake of changing.

—Our top managers don’t know nor does it appear 

important for them to understand what we do and how 

we do it.

Negative comments about facility/division-level management also reflected lack of technical expertise, support 

for employees, and general leadership style. The following 

are examples of the types of negative comments regarding 

local management:

—[Facility] management is technically incompetent...

—My facility manager is the worst manager in history.

The largest negative topic within confidence in management was for FAA management in general (no level 

specified). Many employees made general statements 

about the capabilities of FAA leadership or about the 

management culture within the agency. The following 

are typical examples of the comments about FAA management in general (unspecified level):

—Management lacks the expertise or experience to 

manage.

—FAA management is a total catastrophe. Regardless 

of all the money spent, programs developed and procedural 

changes made there remains an enormous credibility problem 

with the FAA management.

General fairness. The most common theme found in 

comments coded into the general fairness category (207 

surveys) was the “buddy” or “good ol’ boy” system. Some 

comments also referenced the practice of nepotism in 

the agency. Within this category, employees provided 

comments referencing specific levels of management. 

The largest number of comments, however, referenced 

the FAA in general (106 surveys). This was followed by 

comments about facility/division management (47 surveys), management of no specified level (26 surveys), and 

supervisors (26 surveys). The remaining levels (i.e., top 
9

management, regional management, and non-supervisors) 

received comments on 10 or fewer surveys. It should be 

noted that there was only one positive comment regarding 

this comment category. Examples of negative comments 

regarding FAA general fairness follow:

—I have been in the agency before, during, and after 

the strike and the only people that benefit are the ‘good 

ole boys’.

—Nepotism runs rampant in this region, and therefore, 

we do not always get the most qualified employees.

Management concern for employees. Within the category 

of management concern for employees (255 surveys), 

the largest number of comments referenced the FAA in 

general (110 surveys). This was followed by comments 

about top management (65 surveys), management of 

no specified level (39 surveys), facility/division management (34 surveys), supervisors (11 surveys), and regional 

management (6 surveys). Comments in this category 

indicated the belief that the FAA, as an organization, 

showed little or no concern for the welfare of its employees. 

Examples of negative comments regarding FAA concern 

for employees follow:

—It is quite clear that the FAA doesn’t care about the 

employees or the ‘customers’ in this area.

—In the past three to four years the FAA has made agreement after agreement to benefit themselves with little or no 

concerns for their labor force.

Trust. Within the category of trust (232 surveys), 

the two most frequent negative topics were trust in top 

management (106 surveys) and trust in the FAA (104 

surveys). Comments included in this category referenced 

a lack of trust in the FAA, management, and coworkers 

or the perception of dishonesty. Examples of comments 

for these topics follow:

—It is very hard to trust an employer who refuses to tell 

the truth and does not respect their employee’s rights.

—The current admin. lies and is deceitful and will not 

earn the trust of its employees.

Communication

The area of communication included two major 

comment categories, general communication and downward communication. Downward communication (216 

surveys) was included in the top negative comment list 

(Table 10). 

Downward communication. Within the category of 

downward communication (216 surveys), many comments referenced levels of FAA management; however, 

the largest number of comments referenced the FAA in 

general (139 surveys). Employees indicated that information regarding policy changes, program implementation, and information necessary to do their job was not 

communicated effectively or was not timely. Examples 

of these kinds of comments follow:

—The FAA provides excellent initial training to work 

Air Traffic and communicates with pilots and is terrible 

at follow up training and communicating with its own 

employees!

—Frequently information and policy is changed and 

unless the website is reviewed, we don’t know.

Model Work Environment

The FAA has established policies related to achieving 

and maintaining a Model Work Environment (MWE) 

that is productive and hospitable and that mirrors the 

Nation’s diversity (www.faa.gov/ahr/eoss/ModlEnvr/action.htm). Respondents made comments about the FAA’s 

MWE policies and about various areas related to the FAA’s 

success in creating a model work environment (Table 11). 

Only one of the MWE topics, hostile work environment 

(170 surveys), was included in the top 50% of negative 

topics; therefore, other topics are not discussed.

Hostile work environment. Hostile work environment 

(170 surveys) ranked as the twentieth negative topic for the 

FAA overall. Comments in this topic had several themes. 

While some respondents indicated only the existence of a 

hostile work environment or witnessing or experiencing a 

hostile work environment, others indicated that a specific 

employee or member of management’s actions or behavior 

promoted or created a hostile work environment. Still 

other employees directly linked FAA policies or decisions 

to the creation of a hostile environment. The following 

are respondent comments reflecting these themes:

—A hostile work environment exists within this office.

—I have had two incidents in the past years that by definition would be classified as a hostile work environment.

—My working environment is extremely hostile due to my 

immediate supervisor and the fact that there is no support 

from upper management.

—Decisions are made not to better our working environment but to create hostile and unfriendly working 

conditions.
10

Part III. Other Issues of Concern

Many respondents made comments about areas of 

concern to them that were not specifically addressed by 

the EAS 2003 and that could not be categorized with 

existing EAS constructs. These areas included topics 

regarding FAA policies, practices, and programs; FAA 

organizational structure; comments specific to a LOB or 

MO; management and union relations; comments about 

current contractors; and comments about the survey itself. 

Three of the top negative comment categories/topics were 

from these areas.

FAA Policies, Practices, and Programs 

Employees made comments regarding different FAA 

policies, accepted practices, and programs (Table 12). 

Comments referenced everything from the systems used to 

task hours worked (LDR or CRU-X) to the bureaucracy 

of the agency. The FAA policies, practices, and programs 

category (272 surveys) consisted of three topics, including general comments about policies, practices, and 

programs; LDR and CRU-X; and medical standards and 

qualifications. The politics/bureaucracy topic was not 

included in the larger category of FAA policies, practices, 

and programs.

FAA policies, practices, and programs. Within the 

category of FAA policies, practices, and programs (272 

surveys), general comments were the most frequent (219 

surveys). Some respondents made negative comments 

about FAA policies and plans in general, while others 

mentioned specific policies, programs, or accepted practices. Other comments referenced the complexity of FAA 

procedures or paperwork. The following statements are 

examples of these themes:

—FAA policies & plans appear more directed to serve the 

FAA than the Aviation public. 

—There is a lot to be said for simplicity. New procedures 

should attempt to streamline and make the job easier and 

more efficient, not the opposite.

—National Suggestion Program is a joke

Politics and bureaucracy. While not included in the top 

negative comment topics, comments regarding politics 

and bureaucracy only narrowly missed the cut (165 surveys). Some employees stated that FAA upper management 

responded to external political pressure at the expense of 

the safety of the National Airspace System (NAS). 

—At the upper levels, I’d like to see less politics and less 

catering to industry, and more focus on a performancebased NAS.

Survey

In many cases, respondents used the comments as a 

way to provide feedback about the survey itself (Table 

13). The comment topics of general comments regarding the survey; concerns regarding anonymity; survey 

construction, content, and length; and the cost of the 

survey were all included in the general survey category. 

Management use of the survey results was considered an 

individual topic. Both the general survey category (245 

surveys) and management use of survey results topic 

(173 surveys) were among the top negative comment 

categories/topics.

General Survey. Within the general survey category 

(245 surveys), the most frequent negative comments 

were about survey construction, content, or length (123 

surveys). The majority of those comments referenced the 

length of the survey with respondents stating that the 

survey was too long. However, some comments referenced 

item wording or response options. The following are two 

examples of negative comments for this topic:

—Surveys are good, but this one is so lengthy! Couldn’t 

you make it shorter – much shorter – and still get the information you need?

—Once again the instructions ‘to use your best judgment’ 

in selecting a response shows a poorly written survey since 

‘neither agree or disagree’ is not a good answer for something 

that has not happened and therefore does not need to be 

dealt with by my supervisor.

Management use of survey results.Employees provided a 

number of negative comments regarding the use of surveys 

results by FAA management (173 surveys). Comments 

reflected two different themes within this topic. First, 

although management solicited feedback and comments, 

employees indicated that they believed that management 

does not care about the feedback or are unwilling to use 

the feedback to make changes. Many employees cited a 

lack of visible action as a result of previous surveys. Second, 

some employees commented that the results of the survey 

were biased or “filtered.” The following are representative 

of the respondent comments within this topic:

—You ask for our feedback and I really don’t believe you 

care one way or the other.

—I don’t think that anything will come of this survey 

because we never saw the results in the past.

—When the results of these surveys are published, they 

often appear filtered or “sugar coated” when briefed to 

everyone.
11

Part IV. Comparisons Across Organizations

Although this paper is intended to describe the FAA 

overall, a brief description of the most frequent topics 

by LOB/MO is provided to recognize the relevancy of 

topics for certain organizations. A decision was made 

to look at the two most frequent topics of discussion 

within an organization, both positive and negative. It 

is important to realize that although a topic may have 

been a frequent point of discussion within an LOB or 

MO that does not imply that there were an enormous 

number of comments. For example, a recurrent topic 

within AAT had well over 300 comments whereas in 

ARA the number was in the teens. 

Some general themes did emerge across LOBs. Negative feedback regarding morale was common. Specifically, 

morale-related concerns were the most frequent negative 

topic for AAF, O-ATS, and ARA and the second most 

frequent topic for AAT and AOA/AST. Negative comments about management knowledge, skills, abilities, 

and leadership was a frequent topic for AOA/AST, AFS, 

AIR, ARA, ARC, and ARP.

Similar topics appeared within the positive comments 

as well. Discussing satisfaction with their job was common for AAT, AAF, AFS, AOA/AST, AIR and O-AVR 

employees. As mentioned earlier for the FAA overall, 

many employees remarked positively upon their loyalty 

and commitment to the FAA. This topic was frequent 

for AAF, AFS, ARA, ARC, O-AVR, and AAT.

There were some differences in what was addressed 

across organizations. The FAA has a central mission; 

however, each organization may be faced with different 

objectives to achieve, different metrics of performance, 

and/or different pay systems. Thus, employees in different organizations occasionally raise unique issues. For 

example, staffing was the second most frequent concern 

for AAF employees, whereas, employees within AAT 

criticized privatization and future contracting. Within 

O-ATS, employees remarked negatively on financial 

resources and equipment modernization, and equitable 

selection for promotions was a point of contention for 

AFS, ARA, ARC, and O-AVR.

DISCUSSION

More than one-third of the FAA employees who completed the 2003 EAS took the time to provide additional 

written comments. Comments were provided by individuals in every Line of Business and Major Organization and 

covered a wide range of important topics. The comments 

provided by employees can be an extremely important 

part of any survey of employee attitudes, extending the 

usefulness of the survey beyond the particular questions 

selected for the survey and painting a more complete 

picture of the issues facing an organization. It should be 

noted that in many cases, respondent comments supported the results of the EAS. For example, two of the 

top positive-comment categories/topics, job satisfaction 

and committed/loyal to the FAA, received very favorable 

responses on the survey. Likewise, many of the top negative-comment categories or topics received low ratings 

on the survey (i.e., satisfaction with core compensation, 

accountability, dealing with poor performers, etc.).

The purpose of this report was to provide a qualitative 

analysis of a random sample of 33% of the comments 

for each LOB/MO by grouping the comments into 

content categories and topics. In addition, a quantitative 

assessment of the proportion of comments in given areas 

was provided for the top 50% of positive and negative 

comments. To add depth and breadth to the comment 

categories and topics, direct quote examples of each type 

of comment were also provided. 

While the general sentiment of the comments was 

negative, it should be noted that for a variety of reasons, 

this should be expected. Employees generally take the 

time to inform management of areas that need attention. In the case of the 2003 EAS, these areas included a 

number of issues regarding leadership, such as confidence 

in management, fairness, management concern for employees, encouraging hard work, and trust. Morale and 

potential privatization were two other areas of concern 

for employees. Comments regarding the core compensation pay system, promotion selection equity, accountability, and dealing with poor performers relate directly 

to performance-based management and indicate that 

employees do pay attention to what they see as unfairness 

and inequity in these systems. Comments also reflected 

a lack of available workplace resources such as personnel, budget, quality equipment, and new technology. In 

particular, comments regarding understaffing, inability 

to hire, and heavy workloads reflected an atmosphere in 

which employees are being asked to do more with less. 

The survey itself received a number of negative comments 

related to respondent anonymity, cost of administration, 

and survey content and length. The majority indicated 

that the survey was too long. 

Given that negative comments are to be expected, it 

is important to note that positive comments, even in 

smaller numbers, are an important indicator of what an 

organization is doing right. The positive comments from 

the 2003 EAS indicate that many FAA employees have 

confidence in management, particularly at the facility/division and immediate supervisor levels. In addition, the 

comments reflect that while employees have a number 

of concerns, they are satisfied with their jobs overall and 
12

are committed to the FAA. Finally, the FAA has a very 

talented and skilled workforce that has confidence in the 

knowledge, skills, and abilities of their coworkers. These 

comments reflect the strengths of the FAA.

While the comments provided on the EAS can outline 

a roadmap to targeting the areas that are most important 

to the FAA workforce, it should be noted that another area 

of concern identified in the comments was that management would not use the results of the survey and that the 

results would be “sugar-coated” by management to make 

the agency look good. Additionally, some respondents 

may perceive that their comments are being ignored 

because they may have provided information regarding 

a specific incident or problem that they would like to see 

addressed, or they may have requested a specific action 

be taken or requested to be contacted; however, due to 

the anonymous nature of the survey, these requests could 

not be honored. Nonetheless, the FAA clearly has an 

excellent foundation from which to address the negative 

comments from the 2003 survey — the commitment of 

a skilled and talented workforce. How best to address the 

concerns raised in these comments will require the efforts, 

support, and commitment of upper management. 

References

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, 

K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of 

General Psychology, 5, 323-70.

Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2003). On wildebeests 

and humans: The preferential detection of negative 

stimuli. Psychological Science, 14 (1), 14-8.

Fiske, S. T. (1980). Attention and weight in person 

perception: The impact of negative and extreme 

behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 889-906.

Hackworth, C. A., Cruz, C. E., Goldman, S., Jack, D. 

G., King, S. J., & Twohig, P. (2004). Employee 

attitudes within the Federal Aviation Administration. (DOT/FAA/AM-04/22). Washington, DC: 

Federal Aviation Administration Office of Aerospace Medicine.1

Hamilton, D. L., & Zanna, M. P. (1972). Differential 

weighting of favorable and unfavorable attributes in 

impressions of personality. Journal of Experimental 

Research in Personality, 6, 204-12. 

Heller,D., Judge, T., & Watson, D. (2002). The confounding role of personality and trait affectivity 

in the relationship between job and life satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (7),

815-35.

King, S. J., Broach, D., Jack, D. G., & Thompson, D. 

(2001). Analysis of employee comments on the 

FAA employee attitude survey 2000 (unpublished 

manuscript).

Pratto, F., & John, O. P. (1991). Automatic vigilance: 

The attention-grabbing power of negative social 

information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 380-91.

Roese, N. J., & Olson, J. M. (1997). Counterfactual 

thinking: The intersection of affect and function. 

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 

1-59.

Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, 

negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality 

and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296-320.

Smith, P. (1992). In pursuit of happiness: Why study 

general job satisfaction? In C. Cranny, P. Smith, 

& E. Stone (Eds.) Job satisfaction: How people feel 

about their jobs and how it affects their performance

(5-19). New York: Lexington Books.

Ting, Y. (1996). Analysis of job satisfaction of the federal 

white-collar work force: Findings from the Survey 

of Federal Employees. American Review of Public 

Administration, 26 (4), 439-56.

U.S. Merit System Protection Board (2003). The Federal 

Workforce for the 21st Century: Results of the Merit 

Principles Survey 2000. Retrieved July 29, 2004 

from http://www.mspb.gov/studies/mps_2000/

merit_principles.pdf.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management (2002). What do 

Federal Employees Say? Results from the 2002 Federal Human Capital Survey. Retrieved June 21, 2004 

from http://www.fhcs.opm.gov/fhcsReport.pdf.

1This publication and all Office of Aerospace Medicine technical 

reports are available in full-text from the Civil Aerospace Medical 

Institute’s publications Web site: http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/

medical/oamtechreports/
13

Tables

Table 1. Commented Surveys Received and Coded by Line of Business and Major Organization 

Line of Business (LOB) and Major 

Organization (MO) 

Number of 

Surveys 

Received 

Number of 

Surveys With 

Comments

Percent of 

Surveys With 

Comments

Number of 

Surveys 

Coded 

Percent of 

Commented

Surveys Coded

Administrator, Staff Offices, and Commercial 

Space Transportation (AOA-AST) 1,079 352 33% 120 34% 

Air Traffic Services (ATS) 

 Air Traffic (AAT) 8,817 4,300 49% 1,420 33% 

 Airway Facilities (AAF) 6,091 1,960 32% 650 33% 

 Other Air Traffic (O-ATS) 268 86 32% 30 35% 

Regulation and Certification (AVR) 

 Flight Standards (AFS) 3,051 845 28% 280 33% 

 Aircraft Certification (AIR) 715 203 28% 70 34% 

Other Regulation and Certification (O-AVR) 315 82 26% 30 37% 

Research and Acquisition (ARA) 928 276 30% 90 33% 

Regions and Centers (ARC) 1,269 375 30% 130 35% 

Airports (ARP) 330 121 37% 40 33% 

No Line of Business Identified 10 6 60% 0 0% 

Totals 22,873 8,606 38% 2,860 33% 

Table 2. Top Positive Comment Categories and Topics for the FAA Overall 

PART I: INDICATORS OF SATISFACTION Number of Surveys 

 QUALITY OF WORK LIFE 

Satisfaction with Job Overall ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 178

 ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT 

Committed/Loyal to the FAA ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 131

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT 

 WORKPLACE RESOURCES 

Confidence in Nonsupervisory Employees’ Knowledge/Skills/Abilities ------------------------------ 94

 LEADERSHIP 

Confidence in Management ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (249)

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. 
14

Table 3. Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics for the FAA Overall 

PART I: INDICATORS OF SATISFACTION Number of Surveys 

 QUALITY OF WORK LIFE 

Morale ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 561

 Privatization/Future Contracting --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (489)

Promotion Selection Equity --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 252

 COMPENSATION SATISFACTION 

Satisfaction with Pay System (Core Compensation) ------------------------------------------------------- (223)

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT 

 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 

Encouraging Hard Work ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (268)

Accountability --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (213)

Dealing with Poor Performers ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (224)

 WORKPLACE RESOURCES 

Understaffed ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 356

Workload Too Heavy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 171

 Resource Availability ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (203)

 Equipment ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (203)

LEADERSHIP 

 Confidence in Management -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1,033)

 General Fairness ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (207)

 Management Concern for Employees ------------------------------------------------------------------------- (255)

 Trust -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (232)

 COMMUNICATION 

Downward Communication --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (216)

 MODEL WORK ENVIRONMENT (MWE) 

Hostile Work Environment ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 170

PART III: OTHER ISSUES OF CONCERN 

 Federal Aviation Administration Policies, Practices, and Programs --------------------------------------- (272)

 SURVEY 

Survey (General, Content, and Effectiveness) --------------------------------------------------------------- (245)

Management Use of Survey Results --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 173

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. 
15

Table 4. Elements of Quality of Work Life Comments for FAA Overall 

PART I: INDICATORS OF SATISFACTION 

Number of 

Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of 

Surveys 

Positive 

 QUALITY OF WORK LIFE 

Satisfaction With Job Overall --------------------------------------------------- 36 178* 

Satisfaction With Quality of Work Life 

Morale ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 561** 11 

Privatization/Future Contracting --------------------------------------------- (489a)** (12a)

 General Comments About Privatization/Future Contracting ------ 471a 12a

 Privatization/Future Contracting Impact on Job Security ---------- 184a 0a

 Privatization/Future Contracting Impact on Retirement ------------ 22a 0a

 Privatization/Future Contracting Impact on Earnings --------------- 23a 0a

Promotions 

 General Comments About Promotions --------------------------------- 19 0 

 Promotion Opportunities --------------------------------------------------- 143 2 

 Promotion Selection Equity ----------------------------------------------- 252** 0 

 Move Money (PCS) Allocation ------------------------------------------- 18 0 

 Ability to Transfer or Change Locations -------------------------------- 40 0 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

* Top Positive Comment Categories and Topics 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 

Table 5. Compensation Satisfaction Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART I: INDICATORS OF SATISFACTION 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 COMPENSATION SATISFACTION 

Satisfaction with Pay System ---------------------------------------------- (223b)** (2b)

Satisfaction with Core Compensation --------------------------------- 136b 2b

Core Compensation Impact on Earnings ----------------------------- 50b 0b

Core Compensation Impact on Retirement -------------------------- 10b 0b

Core Compensation Subjectivity of Pay Increases (SCI) and 

Promotions ------------------------------------------------------------------- 119b 0b 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts, but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 

Table 6. Organizational Commitment Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART I: INDICATORS OF SATISFACTION 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT 

Organizational Commitment 

Committed/Loyal to the FAA ---------------------------------------------- 119 131* 

Abuse of Leave -------------------------------------------------------------- 30 --- 

General Comments About the FAA ------------------------------------- 164 67 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

* Top Positive Comment Categories and Topics 
16

Table 7. Performance Management Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 

Encouraging Hard Work ------------------------------------------------------- (268c)** (20c)

FAA Encourages Hard Work ----------------------------------------------- 203c 4c

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Encourages Hard Work -------- 14c 0c

Regional Management Encourages Hard Work ----------------------- 4c 0c

Facility/Division Management Encourages Hard Work ----------- 21c 8c

Management (No Level Specified) Encourages Hard Work -------- 24c 0c

Supervisor Encourages Hard Work --------------------------------------- 15c 9c

Nonsupervisory Employees Encourage Hard Work ------------------ 0c 1c

Accountability ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (213d)** (3d)

FAA Held Accountable ------------------------------------------------------- 82d 1d

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Held Accountable --------------- 11d 1d

Regional Management Held Accountable ------------------------------- 4d 0d

Facility/Division Management Held Accountable ---------------------- 29d 1d

Management (No Level Specified) Held Accountable --------------- 55d 0d

Supervisors Deal Held Accountable -------------------------------------- 22d 0d

Nonsupervisory Employees Held Accountable ------------------------ 40d 0d

Dealing with Poor Performers ------------------------------------------------- (224e)** (1e)

FAA Deals With Poor Performers ----------------------------------------- 128e 0e

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Deals With Poor Performers -- 4e 1e

Regional Management Deals With Poor Performers ----------------- 9e 0e

Facility/Division Management Deals With Poor Performers -------- 29e 0e

Management (No Level Specified) Deals With Poor Performers -- 43e 0e

Supervisors Deal With Poor Performers --------------------------------- 20e 0e 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 
17

Table 8. Workplace Resource Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 WORKPLACE RESOURCES 

Staffing

General Comments About Staffing ---------------------------------- 27 0 

FAA Ability to Hire/Attract New Employees ------------------------ 162 1 

Use of Personnel (Staffing Rules and Regulations) ----------- 45 0 

Understaffed --------------------------------------------------------------- 356** --- 

Overstaffed ----------------------------------------------------------------- 10 --- 

Adequacy of Time for Job

Workload Too Heavy ---------------------------------------------------- 171** --- 

Workload Too Light ------------------------------------------------------ 6 --- 

Workgroup Knowledge

General Confidence in FAA Personnel's KSA -------------------- 48 19 

Confidence in Nonsupervisory Employees’ KSA ----------------- 129 94* 

Resources

Material Resources --------------------------------------------------------- (203f)** (3f)

General Comment About Resources/Equipment ----------------- 10f 0f

Budget or Financial Resources --------------------------------------- 164f 0f

Resource Availability ---------------------------------------------------- 49f 3f

Equipment --------------------------------------------------------------------- (203g)** (4g)

Equipment Quality/Maintenance ----------------------------------- 162g 3g

Quality of Equipment Modernization ------------------------------ 51g 1g

Timeliness of Equipment Modernization ------------------------- 34g 0g

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

* Top Positive Comment Categories and Topics 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 
18

Table 9. Confidence in Management and Supervisors Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 LEADERSHIP 

Confidence in Management ------------------------------------------------ (1,033h)** (249h)*

Top Management (AOA and LOB) KSA/Leadership Style -------- 271h 29h

Regional Management KSA/Leadership Style ----------------------- 81h 5h

Facility/Division Management KSA/Leadership Style -------------- 301h 72h

Management (No Level Specified) KSA/Leadership Style -------- 323h 11h

Supervisor KSA/Leadership Style --------------------------------------- 216h 71h

General Fairness -------------------------------------------------------------- (207i)** (1i)

FAA General Fairness ------------------------------------------------------ 106i 0i

Top Management (AOA and LOB) General Fairness -------------- 10i 0i

Regional Management General Fairness ----------------------------- 4i 0i

Facility/Division Management General Fairness -------------------- 47i 0i

Management (No Level Specified) General Fairness -------------- 26i 0i

Supervisor General Fairness --------------------------------------------- 26i 1i

Nonsupervisory Employees General Fairness ----------------------- 2i 0i

Management Concern for Employees ----------------------------------- (255j)** (18j)

FAA Concern for Employees --------------------------------------------- 110j 5j

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Concern for Employees ------ 65j 2j

Regional Management Concern for Employees --------------------- 6j 1j

Facility/Division Management Concern for Employees ------------ 34j 5j

Management (No Level Specified) Concern for Employees ------ 39j 0j

Supervisor Concern for Employees ------------------------------------- 11j 6j

Trust ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (232k)** (17k)

Trust in FAA ------------------------------------------------------------------- 104k 3k

Trust in Top Management (AOA and LOB) --------------------------- 106k 2k

Trust in Regional Management ------------------------------------------ 10k 2k

Trust in Facility/Division Management --------------------------------- 65k 9k

Trust in Management (No Level Specified) --------------------------- 46k 1k

Trust in Supervisors --------------------------------------------------------- 31k 5k

Trust in Coworkers ---------------------------------------------------------- 17k 2k 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

* Top Positive Comment Categories and Topics 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 

Table 10. Downward Communication Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 COMMUNICATION 

Downward Communication -------------------------------------------------- (216l)** (14l)

FAA Downward Communication ----------------------------------------- 139l 5l

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Downward Communication -- 23l 4l

Regional Management Downward Communication ---------------- 12l 0l

Facility/Division Management Downward Communication ------- 28l 2l

Management (No Level Specified) Downward Communication -- 19l 0l

Supervisor Downward Communication -------------------------------- 13l 4l 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 
19

Table 11. Model Work Environment Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 MODEL WORK ENVIRONMENT (MWE) 

MWE Success

Handling of MWE Complaints -------------------------------------------- 66 1 

General Comments About a MWE in the FAA ----------------------- 24 4 

Hostile Work Environment ------------------------------------------------ 170** --- 

Discriminatory Treatment Based on Protected Characteristic --- 74 --- 

Discriminatory Treatment Based on Age (Mandatory 

Retirement) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 --- 

Sexual Harassment (Experienced/Witnessed) ----------------------- 17 --- 

Reverse Discrimination ---------------------------------------------------- 56 --- 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 

Table 12. FAA Policies, Practices, and Programs Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART III: OTHER ISSUES OF CONCERN 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 FAA POLICIES, PRACTICES, AND PROGRAMS --------------------------- (272m)** (8m)

General Comments About FAA Policies, Practices, and Programs - 219m 8m

LDR or CRU-X ------------------------------------------------------------------ 48m 0m

Medical Standards/Qualifications ------------------------------------------ 21m 0m

Politics/Bureaucracy -------------------------------------------------------------- 165 --- 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics 

Table 13. Survey Comments for the FAA Overall 

PART III: OTHER ISSUES OF CONCERN 

Number of Surveys 

Negative 

 Number of Surveys 

Positive 

 Survey 

General Survey -------------------------------------------------------------------- (245n)** (12n)

General Comments About the Survey -------------------------------------- 58n 12n

Respondent Anonymity --------------------------------------------------------- 63n 0n

Survey Construction/Content/Length --------------------------------------- 123n 0n

Survey Cost Effectiveness ----------------------------------------------------- 23n 0n

Management Use of Survey Results ----------------------------------------- 173** 0 

Parentheses denote a comment category rather than a single topic. Because an individual may have contributed to 

numerous topic counts but would only contribute to the overall category count once, topic counts within a category may 

not sum to the category total. 

** Top Negative Comment Categories and Topics

A-1

Appendix A - Comment Codes Assigned to EAS 2003 Employee Comments

Negative

Codes

Positive

Codes

PART I: INDICATORS OF SATISFACTION 

QUALITY OF WORK LIFE

Satisfaction with Job Overall * 130 130P

Satisfaction with Quality of Work Life

Morale ** 120 120P

Work Site

Work Site/Facility Satisfaction 140 140P

Physical Working Conditions 150 150P

Work Schedules and Telecommuting

Flexi-place/Time/Telecommute/Job Sharing 102 101P

Work Schedules/Rotating Shifts/Quick Turn-Around Shifts 103 103P

Job Security (Furloughs/RIFs) 40 40P

Privitization/Future Contracting

General Comments About Privitization/Future Contracting ** 223 223P

Privitization/Future Contracting Impact on Job Security 224 224P

Privitization/Future Contracting Impact on Retirement 225 225P

Privitization/Future Contracting Impact on Earnings 226 226P

Promotions

General Comments About Promotions 320 320P

Promotion Opportunities 321 321P

Promotion Selection Equity ** 322 322P

Move Money (PCS) Allocation 276 276P

Ability to Transfer or Change Locations 323 323P

COMPENSATION SATISFACTION 

Satisfaction with Compensation

Satisfaction with Pay Due to AT Reclassifcation 54 54P

Satisfaction with Pay Due to Core Compensation 64 64P

General Satisfaction with Pay 80 80P

Satisfaction with Per Diem/Travel Money 81 81P

Satisfaction with Pay System

Satisfaction with AT Reclassification 50 50P

Satisfaction with Core Compensation ** 60 60P

Core Compensation Impact on Earnings 61 61P

Core Compensation Impact on Retirement 62 62P

Core Compensation Subjectivity of Pay Increases (SCI) and Promotions 63 63P

Equity in Pay and Benefits

General Pay Equity within the FAA 71 71P

Pay Equity Due to AT Reclassification

Pay Equity Between Towers 51 51P

Pay Equity Between Flight Service and Towers/Centers 52 52P

Pay Equity Between ATCS Separation Service and Other Employees 53 53P

Pay Equity Compared to Outside FAA 72 72P

Satisfaction with Benefits

General Benefits 18 18P

Insurance-Health/Dental/Optical/Disability 19 19P

Leave

General Statement about Leave 20 20P

Ability to Take Leave 22 22P

* Top positive categories and topics.

**Top negative categories and topics.

Shaded areas represent topics collapsed into categories.
A-2

Appendix A - Comment Codes Assigned to EAS 2003 Employee Comments

Negative

Codes

Positive

Codes

Retirement

General Comments about Retirement 30 30P

Age 56 Retirement 31 31P

Equity of Age 56 Requirement 32 32P

Retirement System Penalizes Age 56 Retirees 33 33P

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT

Organizational Commitment

Committed/Loyal to the FAA * 110 110P

Leave Abuse 21 ---

General Comments about the FAA 210 210P

Intent to Leave FAA

Intend to Leave FAA 160 160P

High Turnover 161 ---

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

Performance Discussion and Clarity of Performance Expectations

General Comment about Appraisals/IDP 330 330P

Appraisal/IDP Frequency 331 331P

Appraisal/IDP Effectiveness 332 332P

Encouraging Hard Work (Item 102)

FAA Encourages Hard Work ** 15 15P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Encourages Hard Work 15.1 15.1P

Regional Management Encourages Hard Work 15.2 15.2P

Facility/Division Management Encourages Hard Work 15.3 15.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Encourages Hard Work 15.4 15.4P

Supervisor Encourages Hard Work 15.5 15.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees Encourage Hard Work 15.6 15.6P

Recognition and Rewards

General Comments about Rewards and Recognition 90 90P

Rewards and Recognition Selection Equity 91 91P

Rewards and Recognition Frequency 92 92P

Rewards and Recognition Effectiveness 93 93P

Training

General Comments about Training 380 380P

Training Opportunity Timeliness/Availability 381 381P

Training Quality/Consistency 382 382P

Equity of Access to Training 383 383P

ATC Train to Succeed 384 384P

FAA Academy Training 385 385P

Accountability

FAA Personnel Held Accountable ** 1 1P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Held Accountable 1.1 1.1P

Regional Management Held Accountable 1.2 1.2P

Facility/Division Management Held Accountable 1.3 1.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Held Accountable 1.4 1.4P

Supervisors Held Accountable 1.5 1.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees Held Accountable 1.6 1.6P

* Top positive categories and topics.

**Top negative categories and topics.

Shaded areas represent topics collapsed into categories.
A-3

Appendix A - Comment Codes Assigned to EAS 2003 Employee Comments

Negative

Codes

Positive

Codes

Dealing with Poor Performers

FAA Deals with Poor Performers ** 14 14P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Deals with Poor Performers 14.1 14.1P

Regional Management Deals with Poor Performers 14.2 14.2P

Facility/Division Management Deals with Poor Performers 14.3 14.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Deals with Poor Performers 14.4 14.4P

Supervisors Deal with Poor Performers 14.5 14.5P

"Mess Up Move Up" Promotions 310 ---

PERFORMANCE FOCUS

Customer Support

FAA Committed to Customer Support/Mission 9 9P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Committed to Customer Support/Mission 9.1 9.1P

Regional Management Committed to Customer Support/Mission 9.2 9.2P

Facility/Division Management Committed to Customer Support/Mission 9.3 9.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Committed to Customer Support/Mission 9.4 9.4P

Supervisors Committed to Customer Support/Mission 9.5 9.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees Committed to Customer Support/Mission 9.6 9.6P

FAA Mission/NAS Safety/Runway Safety 280 280P

Employee Empowerment

FAA Personnel Empowered 10 10P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Empowered 10.1 10.1P

Regional Management Empowered 10.2 10.2P

Facility/Division Management Empowered 10.3 10.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Empowered 10.4 10.4P

Supervisors Empowered 10.5 10.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees Empowered 10.6 10.6P

Utilize Skills and Abilities of Others

FAA Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others 16 16P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others 16.1 16.1P

Regional Management Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others 16.2 16.2P

Facility/Division Management Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others 16.3 16.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others 16.4 16.4P

Supervisors Utilize the Skills and Abilities of Others 16.5 16.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees Utilize the Skills and Abilities of Others 16.6 16.6P

Utilize the Input of Others

FAA Employees in General Utilize the Input of Others 5 5P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Utilizes the Input of Others 5.1 5.1P

Regional Management Utilizes the Input of Others 5.2 5.2P

Facility/Division Management Utilizes the Input of Others 5.3 5.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Utilizes the Input of Others 5.4 5.4P

Supervisors Utilize the Input of Others 5.5 5.5P

WORKPLACE RESOURCES

Staffing

General Staffing

General Comments about Staffing 340 340P

FAA Ability to Hire/Attract New Employees 341 341P

Use of Personnel (Staffing Rules and Regulations) 342 342P

Understaffed ** 343 ---

Overstaffed 344 ---

* Top positive categories and topics.

**Top negative categories and topics.

Shaded areas represent topics collapsed into categories.
A-4

Appendix A - Comment Codes Assigned to EAS 2003 Employee Comments

Negative

Codes

Positive

Codes

Management and Supervisory Staffing

Management Top Heavy 290 ---

Too Few Supervisors 360 ---

Too Many Supervisors 370 ---

FAA Preparing for Future Staffing

Future ATC Staffing 345 345P

Future AAF Staffing 346 346P

Future FSS Staffing 347 347P

Adequacy of Time for Job

Workload Too Heavy ** 390 ---

Workload Too Light 400 ---

Workgroup Knowledge, Skills, Abilities (KSA)

Confidence in FAA Personnel's KSA 13 13P

Confidence in Nonsupervisory Employee's KSA * 13.6 13.6P

Resources

General Comment about Resources/Equipment ** 270 270P

Budget or Financial Resources 271 271P

Resource Availability 272 272P

Equipment

Equipment Quality/Maintenance ** 273 273P

Quality of Equipment Modernization 274 274P

Timeliness of Equipment Modernization 275 275P

LEADERSHIP

Confidence in Management Knowledge, Skills, Abilities (KSA), Leadership

Top Management (AOA and LOB) KSA/Leadership * / ** 13.1 13.1P

Regional Management KSA/Leadership 13.2 13.2P

Facility/Division Management KSA/Leadership 13.3 13.3P

Management (No Level Specified) KSA/Leadership 13.4 13.4P

Confidence in Supervisors

Supervisor KSA/Leadership 13.5 13.5P

General Fairness

FAA General Fairness ** 11 11P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) General Fairness 11.1 11.1P

Regional Management General Fairness 11.2 11.2P

Facility/Division Management General Fairness 11.3 11.3P

Management (No Level Specified) General Fairness 11.4 11.4P

Supervisor General Fairness 11.5 11.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees General Fairness 11.6 11.6P

Disciplinary Fairness

FAA Disciplinary Fairness 12 12P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Disciplinary Fairness 12.1 12.1P

Regional Management Disciplinary Fairness 12.2 12.2P

Facility/Division Management Disciplinary Fairness 12.3 12.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Disciplinary Fairness 12.4 12.4P

Supervisor Disciplinary Fairness 12.5 12.5P

Management Concern for Employees

FAA Concern for Employees ** 7 7P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Concern for Employees 7.1 7.1P

Regional Management Concern for Employees 7.2 7.2P

Facility/Division Management Concern for Employees 7.3 7.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Concern for Employees 7.4 7.4P

Supervisor Concern for Employees 7.5 7.5P

* Top positive categories and topics.

**Top negative categories and topics.

Shaded areas represent topics collapsed into categories.
A-5

Appendix A - Comment Codes Assigned to EAS 2003 Employee Comments

Negative

Codes

Positive

Codes

Trust

Trust in FAA ** 17 17P

Trust in Top Management (AOA and LOB) 17.1 17.1P

Trust in Regional Management 17.2 17.2P

Trust in Facility/Division Management 17.3 17.3P

Trust in Management (No Level Specified) 17.4 17.4P

Trust in Supervisors 17.5 17.5P

Trust in Coworkers 17.6 17.6P

COMMUNICATION

General Communication

General Communication in the FAA 2 2P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) General Communication 2.1 2.1P

Regional Management General Communication 2.2 2.2P

Facility/Division Management General Communication 2.3 2.3P

Management (No Level Specified) General Communication 2.4 2.4P

Supervisor General Communication 2.5 2.5P

Nonsupervisory Employee General Communication 2.6 2.6P

Downward Communication

FAA Downward Communication ** 4 4P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Downward Communication 4.1 4.1P

Regional Management Downward Communication 4.2 4.2P

Facility/Division Management Downward Communication 4.3 4.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Downward Communication 4.4 4.4P

Supervisor Downward Communication 4.5 4.5P

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Positive Communication Climate

FAA Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out 3 3P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out 3.1 3.1P

Regional Management Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out 3.2 3.2P

Facility/Division Management Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out 3.3 3.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out 3.4 3.4P

Supervisors Make Me Afraid to Speak Out 3.5 3.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees Make Me Afraid to Speak Out 3.6 3.6P

Conflict Addressed

FAA Addresses Conflict 8 8P

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Addresses Conflict 8.1 8.1P

Regional Management Addresses Conflict 8.2 8.2P

Facility/Division Management Addresses Conflict 8.3 8.3P

Management (No Level Specified) Addresses Conflict 8.4 8.4P

Supervisors Address Conflict 8.5 8.5P

Nonsupervisory Employees Address Conflict 8.6 8.6P

MODEL WORK ENVIRONMENT (MWE)

MWE Policies

General Comments about FAA MWE Policies 180 180P

Management/Supervisors Committed to MWE Policies 181 181P

Personal Support for MWE Policies 182 182P

Affirmative Action (AA) Policy 183 183P

Equal Opportunity Employment (EEO) Policy 184 184P

* Top positive categories and topics.

**Top negative categories and topics.

Shaded areas represent topics collapsed into categories.
A-6

Appendix A - Comment Codes Assigned to EAS 2003 Employee Comments

Negative

Codes

Positive

Codes

MWE Success

Handling of MWE Complaints 190 190P

General Comments about a Model Work Environment in the FAA 200 200P

Hostile Work Environment ** 205 ---

Discriminatory Treatment Based on Protected Characteristic 201 ---

Discriminatory Treatment Based on Age (Mandatory Retirement) 202 ---

Sexual Harassment (Experienced/Witnessed) 204 ---

Reverse Discrimination 203 ---

Personal Safety at Work 350 350P

Scope of Accountability Board

General Comments about Accountability Board 170 170P

Unfamiliar with Accountability Board 171 ---

Reporting Allegations

Abuse of MWE Complaint Process (Excessive Complaints) 191 ---

Satisfaction with Employee Assistance Program (EAP) 251 251P

PART III: OTHER ISSUES OF CONCERN

FAA Policies, Practices, and Programs

General Comments about FAA Policies, Practices, Programs ** 230 230P

LDR/CRU-X 231 231P

Medical Standards/Qualifications 232 232P

ATOS 540 540P

CSET 550 550P

Politics/Bureaucracy 240 ---

Waste 300 ---

Region Structure

General Comment about Region Structure 260 260P

Consolidate Regions 261 ---

Air Traffic

General Comments About Air Traffic Operations 500 500P

Controller-in-Charge (CIC) Program 505 505P

FAA Treatment of Flight Services Option 510 510P

FAA Management Unaware of Flight Services Function 511 ---

Airway Facilities

FAA Treatment of Airway Facilities 520 520P

Flight Standards

Handbook/FAR 8400 & 8700 530 530P

Excessive paperwork, not enough time in field 560 ---

Management and Union Relations

General Comments About Management and Union Labor Relations 470 470P

Union Participation in Labor Relations 471 471P

Management Participation in Labor Relations 472 472P

Management is Controlled by Unions 430 ---

Unions

General Comment about Unions 410 410P

Union Held Accountable 420 420P

Union Members Discriminated Against 440 ---

Nonmembers Discriminated Against 450 ---

Unionization Forced or Encouraged 460 ---

Current Contractors

General Comments About Current Contractors 220 220P

Contracting Cost Effectiveness of Current Contractors 221 221P

Quality of Current Contract Personnel/Products/Services 222 222P

* Top positive categories and topics.

**Top negative categories and topics.

Shaded areas represent topics collapsed into categories.
A-7

Appendix A - Comment Codes Assigned to EAS 2003 Employee Comments

Negative

Codes

Positive

Codes

Survey

General Comments About the Survey ** 570 570P

Respondent Anonymity 571 571P

Survey Construction/Content/Length 572 572P

Survey Cost Effectiveness 573 573P

Management/Supervisors Allowed No Time to Complete Survey 574 574P

Management Use of Survey Results ** 575 575P

No Codable Comment 999 ---

* Top positive categories and topics.

**Top negative categories and topics.

Shaded areas represent topics collapsed into categories.

B-1

Appendix B - Summary Frequencies of EAS 2003 Employee Comment Codes for the FAA Overall

Negative Positive

PART I: INDICATORS OF SATISFACTION 

QUALITY OF WORK LIFE

Satisfaction with Job Overall -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36 178

Satisfaction with Quality of Work Life

561 11

Work Site

67 63

73 3

Work Schedules and Telecommuting

Flexi-place/Time/Telecommute/Job Sharing --------------------------------------------- 5 27

Work Schedules/Rotating Shifts/Quick Turn-Around Shifts -------------------------- 22 0

Job Security (Furloughs/RIFs) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 63 8

Privatization/Future Contracting

General Comments About Privatization/Future Contracting -------------------------- 471 12

Privatization/Future Contracting Impact on Job Security ------------------------------ 184 0

Privatization/Future Contracting Impact on Retirement -------------------------------- 22 0

Privatization/Future Contracting Impact on Earnings ---------------------------------- 23 0

Promotions

General Comments About Promotions ---------------------------------------------------- 19 0

Promotion Opportunities ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 143 2

Promotion Selection Equity ------------------------------------------------------------------- 252 0

Move Money (PCS) Allocation --------------------------------------------------------------- 18 0

Ability to Transfer or Change Locations --------------------------------------------------- 40 0

COMPENSATION SATISFACTION 

Satisfaction with Compensation

Satisfaction with Pay Due to AT Reclassification --------------------------------------- 12 14

Satisfaction with Pay Due to Core Compensation -------------------------------------- 22 3

General Satisfaction with Pay ---------------------------------------------------------------- 78 40

Satisfaction with Per Diem/Travel Money ------------------------------------------------- 8 0

Satisfaction with Pay System

Satisfaction with AT Reclassification ------------------------------------------------------- 51 0

Satisfaction with Core Compensation ------------------------------------------------------ 136 2

Core Compensation Impact on Earnings -------------------------------------------------- 50 0

Core Compensation Impact on Retirement ----------------------------------------------- 10 0

Core Compensation Subjectivity of Pay Increases (SCI) and Promotions -------- 119 0

Equity in Pay and Benefits

General Pay Equity within the FAA --------------------------------------------------------------- 132 0

Pay Equity Due to AT Reclassification

Pay Equity Between Towers ------------------------------------------------------------------ 22 0

Pay Equity Between Flight Service and Towers/Centers ----------------------------- 16 0

Pay Equity Between ATCS Separation Service and Other Employees ----------- 113 0

Pay Equity Compared to Outside FAA ---------------------------------------------------------- 5 2

Satisfaction with Benefits

General Benefits -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 19

Insurance-Health/Dental/Optical/Disability ----------------------------------------------------- 101 0

Leave

General Statement about Leave ------------------------------------------------------------- 20 3

Ability to Take Leave --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37 1

Retirement

General Comments about Retirement ----------------------------------------------------- 50 7

General Comments about Age 56 Retirement ------------------------------------------- 22 3

Equity of Age 56 Requirement ------------------------------------------------------------- 10 0

Retirement System Penalizes Age 56 Retirees --------------------------------------- 1 0

Morale ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Work Site/Facility Satisfaction ----------------------------------------------------------------

Physical Working Conditions -----------------------------------------------------------------
B-2

Appendix B - Summary Frequencies of EAS 2003 Employee Comment Codes for the FAA Overall

Negative Positive

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT

Organizational Commitment

Committed/Loyal to the FAA ------------------------------------------------------------------ 119 131

Abuse of Leave ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30 ---

General Comments about the FAA --------------------------------------------------------- 164 67

Intent to Leave FAA

Intend to Leave FAA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 141 10

High Turnover ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 33 ---

PART II: MANAGEMENT AND WORK ENVIRONMENT

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

Performance Discussion and Clarity of Performance Expectations

7 1

20 0

31 1

Encouraging Hard Work

203 4

14 0

4 0

21 8

24 0

15 9

0 1

Recognition and Rewards

7 1

92 1

124 3

21 0

Training

41 1

122 2

25 0

98 3

45 1

1 9

Accountability

82 1

11 1

4 0

29 1

55 0

22 0

40 0

Dealing with Poor Performers

128 0

4 1

9 0

29 0

43 0

20 0

"Mess Up Move Up" Promotions ------------------------------------------------------------ 53 ---

Regional Management Deals with Poor Performers ------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Deals with Poor Performers ---------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Deals with Poor Performers --------------------

Supervisors Deal with Poor Performers ---------------------------------------------------

Supervisors Held Accountable ---------------------------------------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Held Accountable ------------------------------------------

FAA Deals with Poor Performers ------------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Deals with Poor Performers --------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Held Accountable ----------------------------------

Regional Management Held Accountable -------------------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Held Accountable ----------------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Held Accountable ----------------------------------

Training Quality/Consistency -----------------------------------------------------------------

ATC Train to Succeed --------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA Academy Training ------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA Personnel Held Accountable -----------------------------------------------------------

Rewards and Recognition Effectiveness --------------------------------------------------

Training Opportunity Timeliness/Availability ----------------------------------------------

Equity of Access to Training ------------------------------------------------------------------

General Comments about Training ---------------------------------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Encourage Hard Work ------------------------------------

General Comments about Rewards and Recognition ----------------------------------

Rewards and Recognition Selection Equity -----------------------------------------------

Rewards and Recognition Frequency ------------------------------------------------------

Regional Management Encourages Hard Work -----------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Encourages Hard Work --------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Encourages Hard Work --------------------------

Supervisor Encourages Hard Work ---------------------------------------------------------

Appraisal/IDP Frequency ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Appraisal/IDP Effectiveness ------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA Encourages Hard Work -----------------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Encourages Hard Work --------------------------

General Comment about Appraisals/IDP --------------------------------------------------
B-3

Appendix B - Summary Frequencies of EAS 2003 Employee Comment Codes for the FAA Overall

Negative Positive

PERFORMANCE FOCUS

Customer Support

102 14

27 0

4 1

9 4

21 0

5 1

5 38

52 43

Employee Empowerment

17 1

0 0

3 0

37 0

23 0

38 0

38 2

Utilize Skills and Abilities of Others

49 1

1 0

0 0

5 0

5 0

1 1

1 0

Utilize the Input of Others

48 1

14 1

4 2

29 3

17 1

14 1

WORKPLACE RESOURCES

Staffing

General Staffing

27 0

162 1

45 0

356 ---

10 ---

Management and Supervisory Staffing

72 ---

46 ---

5 ---

FAA Preparing for Future Staffing

70 0

21 0

7 0

Adequacy of Time for Job

171 ---

6 ---

Workload Too Heavy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Workload Too Light -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Too Many Supervisors -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Future ATC Staffing -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Future AAF Staffing -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Future FSS Staffing -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Understaffed --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overstaffed ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Management Top Heavy ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Too Few Supervisors ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Supervisors Utilize the Input of Others -----------------------------------------------------

General Comments about Staffing ----------------------------------------------------------

FAA Ability to Hire/Attract New Employees -----------------------------------------------

Use of Personnel (Staffing Rules and Regulations) ------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Utilizes the Input of Others ----------------------

Regional Management Utilizes the Input of Others -------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Utilizes the Input of Others ----------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Utilizes the Input of Others ----------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others ----

Supervisors Utilize the Skills and Abilities of Others -----------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Utilize the Skills and Abilities of Others ---------------

FAA Employees in General Utilize the Input of Others -------------------------------

FAA Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others --------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others ----

Regional Management Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others --------------------

Facility/Division Management Utilizes the Skills and Abilities of Others -----------

Facility/Division Management Empowered -----------------------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Empowered -----------------------------------------

Supervisors Empowered -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Empowered --------------------------------------------------

FAA Mission/NAS Safety/Runway Safety -------------------------------------------------

FAA Personnel Empowered ------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Empowered -----------------------------------------

Regional Management Empowered --------------------------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Committed to Customer Support/Mission ---------

Management (No Level Specified) Committed to Customer Support/Mission ---

Supervisors Committed to Customer Support/Mission ---------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Committed to Customer Support/Mission ------------

FAA Committed to Customer Support/Mission -------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Committed to Customer Support/Mission ---

Regional Management Committed to Customer Support/Mission ------------------
B-4

Appendix B - Summary Frequencies of EAS 2003 Employee Comment Codes for the FAA Overall

Negative Positive

Workgroup Knowledge

48 19

129 94

Resources

10 0

164 0

49 3

Equipment

162 3

51 1

34 0

LEADERSHIP

Confidence in Management 

271 29

81 5

301 72

323 11

Confidence in Supervisors

216 71

General Fairness

106 0

10 0

4 0

47 0

26 0

26 1

2 0

Disciplinary Fairness

24 0

0 0

0 0

12 0

2 0

2 0

Management Concern for Employees

110 5

65 2

6 1

34 5

39 0

11 6

0 3

Trust

104 3

106 2

10 2

65 9

46 1

31 5

17 2

Trust in Supervisors -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trust in Coworkers ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trust in Top Management (AOA and LOB) -----------------------------------------------

Trust in Regional Management --------------------------------------------------------------

Trust in Facility/Division Management -----------------------------------------------------

Trust in Management (No Level Specified) -----------------------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Concern for Employees --------------------------

Supervisor Concern for Employees ---------------------------------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Concern for Employees -----------------------------------

Trust in FAA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA Concern for Employees -----------------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Concern for Employees --------------------------

Regional Management Concern for Employees -----------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Concern for Employees --------------------------------

Regional Management Disciplinary Fairness ---------------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Disciplinary Fairness ------------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Disciplinary Fairness -----------------------------

Supervisor Disciplinary Fairness ------------------------------------------------------------

Supervisor General Fairness -----------------------------------------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees General Fairness -------------------------------------------

FAA Disciplinary Fairness ---------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Disciplinary Fairness -----------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) General Fairness ----------------------------------

Regional Management General Fairness -------------------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management General Fairness ----------------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) General Fairness ----------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Knowledge/Skills/Abilities/Leadership --------------

Management (No Level Specified) Knowledge/Skills/Abilities/Leadership --------

Supervisor Knowledge/Skills/Abilities/Leadership ---------------------------------------

FAA General Fairness --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quality of Equipment Modernization --------------------------------------------------------

Timeliness of Equipment Modernization ---------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Knowledge/Skills/Abilities/Leadership --------

Regional Management Knowledge/Skills/Abilities/Leadership -----------------------

General Comment about Resources/Equipment ----------------------------------------------

Budget or Financial Resources --------------------------------------------------------------------

Resource Availability ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Equipment Quality/Maintenance -------------------------------------------------------------

Confidence in FAA Personnel's Knowledge/Skills/Abilities ---------------------------

Confidence in Nonsupervisory Employee's Knowledge/Skills/Abilities ------------
B-5

Appendix B - Summary Frequencies of EAS 2003 Employee Comment Codes for the FAA Overall

Negative Positive

COMMUNICATION

General Communication

42 2

1 0

3 0

3 0

4 0

3 0

1 0

Downward Communication

139 5

23 4

12 0

28 2

19 0

13 4

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Positive Communication Climate

50 0

4 0

1 0

26 0

24 0

25 0

7 0

Conflict Addressed

37 0

5 0

1 0

20 1

17 0

14 0

0 0

MODEL WORK ENVIRONMENT (MWE)

MWE Policies

96 3

147 3

19 22

119 3

6 0

MWE Success

66 1

24 4

170 ---

74 ---

16 ---

17 ---

56 ---

34 2

Scope of Accountability Board

21 0

5 ---

Reverse Discrimination ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Personal Safety at Work -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Comments about Accountability Board -----------------------------------------

Unfamiliar with Accountability Board -------------------------------------------------------

Hostile Work Environment ---------------------------------------------------------------------

Discriminatory Treatment Based on Protected Characteristic -----------------------

Discriminatory Treatment Based on Age (Mandatory Retirement) ------------------

Sexual Harassment (Experienced/Witnessed) -------------------------------------------

Affirmative Action (AA) Policy ----------------------------------------------------------------

Equal Opportunity Employment (EEO) Policy --------------------------------------------

Handling of MWE Complaints ----------------------------------------------------------------

General Comments about a Model Work Environment in the FAA -----------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Address Conflict --------------------------------------------

General Comments about FAA MWE Policies -------------------------------------------

Management/Supervisors Committed to MWE Policies -------------------------------

Personal Support for MWE Policies --------------------------------------------------------

Regional Management Addresses Conflict -----------------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Addresses Conflict --------------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Addresses Conflict --------------------------------

Supervisors Address Conflict -----------------------------------------------------------------

Supervisors Make Me Afraid to Speak Out -----------------------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employees Make Me Afraid to Speak Out ---------------------------

FAA Addresses Conflict ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Addresses Conflict --------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out ----------------

Regional Management Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out -------------------------------

Facility/Division Management Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out -----------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out ----------------

Facility/Division Management Downward Communication ----------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) Downward Communication ---------------------

Supervisor Downward Communication ----------------------------------------------------

FAA Makes Me Afraid to Speak Out --------------------------------------------------------

Nonsupervisory Employee General Communication -----------------------------------

FAA Downward Communication -------------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) Downward Communication ---------------------

Regional Management Downward Communication ------------------------------------

Regional Management General Communication ----------------------------------------

Facility/Division Management General Communication -------------------------------

Management (No Level Specified) General Communication -------------------------

Supervisor General Communication --------------------------------------------------------

General Communication in the FAA --------------------------------------------------------

Top Management (AOA and LOB) General Communication -------------------------
B-6

Appendix B - Summary Frequencies of EAS 2003 Employee Comment Codes for the FAA Overall

Negative Positive

Reporting Allegations

47 ---

3 0

PART III: OTHER ISSUES OF CONCERN

FAA Policies, Practices, and Programs

219 8

48 0

2 0

3 0

21 0

165 ---

113 ---

Region Structure

12 2

31 ---

Air Traffic

25 0

28 0

85 0

23 ---

Airway Facilities

28 0

Flight Standards

9 0

11 ---

Management and Union Relations

82 7

4 0

161 1

129 ---

Unions

94 5

13 0

3 ---

50 ---

8 ---

Current Contractors

16 1

18 0

36 1

Survey

58 12

63 0

123 0

23 0

13 0

173 0

30 ---

Quality of Current Contract Personnel/Products/Services ----------------------------

General Comments About the Survey -----------------------------------------------------

Respondent Anonymity ------------------------------------------------------------------------

No Codable Comment ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Survey Construction/Content/Length -------------------------------------------------------

Survey Cost Effectiveness --------------------------------------------------------------------

Management/Supervisors Allowed No Time to Complete Survey ------------------

Management Use of Survey Results -------------------------------------------------------

Nonmembers Discriminated Against -------------------------------------------------------

Unionization Forced or Encouraged --------------------------------------------------------

General Comments About Current Contractors -----------------------------------------

Contracting Cost Effectiveness of Current Contractors --------------------------------

Management is Controlled by Unions ------------------------------------------------------

General Comment about Unions ------------------------------------------------------------

Union Held Accountable -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Union Members Discriminated Against ----------------------------------------------------

Excessive paperwork, not enough time in field ------------------------------------------

General Comments About Management and Union Labor Relations --------------

Union Negotiates in "Good Faith" -----------------------------------------------------------

Management Negotiates in "Good Faith" --------------------------------------------------

FAA Management Unaware of Flight Services Function ------------------------------

FAA Treatment of Airway Facilities ---------------------------------------------------------

Handbook/FAR 8400 & 8700 -----------------------------------------------------------------

ATOS -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CSET -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consolidate Regions ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Comments About Air Traffic Operations ---------------------------------------

Controller-in-Charge (CIC) Program --------------------------------------------------------

FAA Treatment of Flight Services Option -------------------------------------------------

Medical Standards/Qualifications ------------------------------------------------------------

Politics/Bureaucracy ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Waste -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Comment about Region Structure -----------------------------------------------

Abuse of MWE Complaint Process (Excessive Complaints) -------------------------

Satisfaction with Employee Assistance Program (EAP) ---------------------------------------

General Comments about FAA Policies, Practices, and Programs -----------------

LDR or CRU-X -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-1

Appendix C 

C-1

Examples of Top Positive Respondent Comment Categories and Topic 

Satisfaction with Job Overall

“I am very satisfied with my position and with the FAA.” 

“I love my job.” 

“I love my job with the FAA.” 

“I enjoy working for the FAA and I love my position.” 

“Overall I am very pleased with my job/position and the group that I work with.” 

Committed/Loyal to the FAA

“Do I care what happens to the FAA? Yes Yes Yes.” 

“All in all we have a great organization that I truly believe in.” 

“I have great loyalty towards the FAA.” 

“I am very proud to work for the FAA, and I enjoy working at the [Facility]” 

“I feel proud to work for an agency that keeps millions of people safe on a daily basis.” 

Confidence in Nonsupervisory Employee’s Knowledge/Skills/Abilities

“I am privileged to work with the group of dedicated professionals at the [Facility].” 

“As for my coworkers, they are some of the most awesome people I’ve ever met. They’re more like my family than 

other employees.” 

“I generally feel that my coworkers are competent and also support FAA goals.” 

“The persons’ (for the most part) in the Flight Service Option are very hard working dedicated professionals.” 

“I work with a great bunch of people. For the most part we are professional and proficient in our jobs.” 

 Confidence in Management Knowledge/Skills/Abilities/Leadership Style

“[FAA Administrator] and [Name] have brought refreshing change and restored impartial and decisive leadership to 

our agency.” 

“[FAA Administrator] seems to be very pro-active which is a pleasure to see.” 

“Our current air traffic manager at [Facility], [Name] should be used as a model for improving LMR and employee 

morale and spirit.” 

“The FAA is a great organization and the management is equally as great.” 

“My immediate supervisor is an exceptional individual. He is extremely knowledgeable of FAA/DOT procedures, 

very interested in his subordinates, and is a pleasure to work with.“ 

Appendix C

D-1

Appendix D - Examples of Top Negative Respondent Comments 

Morale

“Morale is low and getting lower.” 

“The morale in the agency continues to decline steadily.” 

“These failures in common sense and respect are the greatest demoralizer of our workforce.” 

“The workforce is demoralized, service to the pilot is suffering and management doesn’t care.” 

“The direction of the agency as a whole is disheartening.” 

Privatization/Future Contracting

“If I won the lottery today and never needed to work again, I would still think privatizing and contracting the FAA is 

a disaster waiting to happen.” 

“Contracting out does not save the government money in the long run. Contracting out hurts safety. Much of 

what government does cannot become ‘for profit’.” 

“The fact that the FAA is not supporting this function as “inherently governmental” is ridiculous and insulting.” 

“We live with the threat of contracting, which destroys job security, which was my #1 reason for joining the FAA." 

“Since I returned to the FAA in 1996 I have constantly felt that my job was going to be contracted out, privatized 

or, sold off.” 

Promotion Selection Equity

“The “good old boys” still live. Buddies get promoted.“ 

“Employee’s get promoted based on favoritism and who their manager is married too.“ 

“Current supervisor attained position as a result of “the buddy system”. Other candidates were more qualified.“ 

“People are always promoted/rewarded strictly based on the good old boy syndrome, not on competency and/or 

work performance.” 

“Promotions are based on this meaningless knowledge, skills, abilities that are “rigged” so lower levels of these 

qualities become comparable.” 

Satisfaction with Pay System (Core Compensation)

“My happiness was short lived when the H band was lagging about $6,000 behind what a real GS-12 step 1 

made. Nine months later I got my I band; now I’m nearly $10,000 behind what a real GS-13 step 1 makes.” 

“Under the current pay plan for ATSS employees of the AF division of the FAA, a newly hired employee will never 

reach the limit of the pay band under which he or she works. There are no longer longevity pay increases but 

there are now so-called performance raises or SCI.” 

“Overtime and SCI’s are given based on buddy system, manager is extremely incompetent, SMO manager is as 

well.”

“Please, take another look at the SCI process. Every employee and manager is frustrated with this system and it 

is basically a duplication and conflict with the performance management system.” 

“My performance has been compensated thru core comp, but not enough. I cannot get my position upgraded.” 

Encouraging Hard Work

“The FAA in no way provides any incentive for doing a good job.” 

“The incentive to do more than the minimum required is just not there.” 

“It seems if you’re a hard worker and you do above and beyond your job your almost punished.” 

“I would be in serous trouble if I looked to my organization to motivate me.” 

“A “pat on the back” is never given. Outside commendations are never even acknowledged.” 
D-2

Appendix D - Examples of Top Negative Respondent Comments 

Accountability

“I believe people should be held accountable for their actions.” 

“Make people accountable.” 

“Hold management accountable for their actions.” 

“I think FAA management is not held responsible for completing the goals of the Administrator.” 

“Employee morale and productivity would greatly increase if all FAA managers were required to take recurrent 

management classes and were held accountable for their management skills.” 

Dealing with Poor Performers

“There are no consequences for employee performance problems.” 

“First, I think the FAA does not deal with substandard performance of certified controllers very well.” 

“We are constantly speaking about improving productivity and raising the bar for performance – yet we allow 

deficiencies to continue unchecked by their immediate supervisors in the region. If management refuses to 

correct these problems, how can we expect cooperation from the workforce when we address problems with 

them?”

“His performance has remained the same for a number of years since management has turned a blind eye to his 

performance since he has ‘personal problems’.” 

“The FAA has never taken corrective actions towards poor performance of an employee, but rather hidden the 

abuse, or moved the individual.” 

Understaffed

“There is getting to be a severe staffing shortage all over HQ.” 

“Staffing is far from adequate to manage responsibilities levied upon my organization.” 

“Our workforce is understaffed and yet we continue to maintain the NAS.” 

“I do not have enough time to get the job done in a thorough manner! We are so understaffed it is pathetic! 

“I have seen from the trenches what understaffing does to safety and morale. The FAA needs to aggressively 

hire now before the mass exodus.” 

Workload Too Heavy

“We are annually expected to do too much work in too short a time span at the end of each FY (it is a state 

of utter chaos and frustration each year!)” 

“I would like to become involved in other job opportunities, but my workload is too heavy.” 

“Sometimes the activities required to help others accomplish their performance plans impose a significant 

workload that impairs our ability to meet our own performance plans.” 

“Managers are stretched too thin and tasked with too much that they no longer have time to manage their 

organizations.” 

“My workload keeps increasing. Sometimes I have to drop what I’m doing to respond to something else.” 

Resource Availability

“We have $0 dollars to spend during the year and then just before Oct. 1 we have $800 to spend in 4 hrs.” 

“The impact of the budget on implementation of projects has seriously affected the ability to do a good job on 

projects.” 

“We are all experiencing the pains of the budget shortfalls, but unfortunately what we see is everyone cutting 

back at the expense of the field.” 

“FAA needs to have one pocket of money, can’t order parts but we can gravel a road because different money.” 

“The lack and reduction of the operating budget for the last 10 years to the sudden ability to increase not just air 

traffic but all employees' wages (some questionable).” 
D-3

Appendix D - Examples of Top Negative Respondent Comments 

Equipment

“Our computer equipment is out-dated but they just keep adding programs and the computers do not operate 

properly as a result.” 

“Current facility is in great disrepair; much of the equipment we use either is broken or fails routinely.” 

“Equipment is not being repaired as necessary.” 

“In our present day of communications emphasis and technical abilities there are no provisions to replace our 

antiquated radio systems; That at best can be said to “suck”.” 

“I have shelves full of equipment that needs to be sent out for exchanges or repairs.” 

Confidence in Management

“Top agency officials are micromanaging even unimportant stuff.” 

“Manager manages through contempt and disrespect for the workforce she is entrusted with. Demonstrates 

complete lack of leadership.“ 

“Management has little to no skills in coaching, mentoring, and delegation.” 

“Current supervisor lacks communication skills. Supervisor becomes very defensive when asked a question on 

any topic.” 

“The supervisor lacks the tact and people skills to manage professional people. We are constantly second 

guessed, berated, and looked upon with distrust when performing our duties.” 

General Fairness

“The “good ol’ boys” network is alive & well.” 

“Decisions are often based on “who you are” instead of facts.” 

“Very dissatisfied with how employees in the agency are treated differently.” 

“There is still the “buddy” system. Some people get away with a lot, while others are held to strict compliance 

with rules/policies.” 

“Political relationships and favoritism still protect a portion of these wrong doers; however, all for the sake of 

being able to do the job.” 

Management Concern for Employees

“The FAA, in my 16-year career has never demonstrated that they are concerned with what employees think.” 

“In the past three to four years the FAA has made agreement after agreement to benefit themselves with little or 

no concerns for their labor force.” 

“It gives the impression HDQ does not CARE about the lowest level workers and they are being sacrificed.” 

“I don’t believe the FAA management in the region or Washington really cares about Air Traffic Controllers in 

smaller facilities.” 

“Management here is oppressive to the workforce and doesn’t care about us at all. 

Trust

“The FAA has failed to ensure my trust on many levels.” 

“It is my perception that there is a general distrust for the competence and integrity of the FAA’s high level 

managers.” 

“My staff and I have been and continue to be lied to by upper management. There is no trust anymore.” 

“How can we respect upper management that doesn’t respect us?” 

“However, I have no trust whatsoever of upper management above my facility to Washington, DC.” 

Downward Communication

“Briefings are thrown in a folder on a desk. Many things could be better learned & communicated by face to face