The number and complexity of operations increases significantly from Level I facilities to Level IIs and IIIs. For this reason, the FAA is opposed to contracting out Level II and III towers. There is no concrete evidence that expanding the contract tower program will result in cost savings to the federal government. And, any reported savings are at the expense of employee salaries, benefits, training, working conditions and equipment. Fewer staff means more money for the company.
Less training means less qualified controllers but more money for the company.
And, since most controllers at contracted facilities are part-time employees, this means fewer benefits and more money for the company. In addition, any savings would be eliminated if contract towers were held to the standards of the FAA facilities. It would be premature to expand the contract tower program at a time when it is unclear whether the FAA has the authority to contract out air traffic control services. A lawsuit, filed in 1994, challenging FAA s decision to privatize Level I facilities has yet to be resolved. In remanding the case, the Court ordered that, the FAA shall not engage in further implementation of the privatization program.