Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight phase: Final Approach; Initial Approach; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ; Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC; Traffic Management
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Weather; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Because there is not a separate TMC at Tower; my roles were divided as FLM and Traffic Manager. When I took the shift two of the departure gates north of the airport were closed which required the Tower to coordinate with the ARTCC Traffic Management unit to reroute two thirds of our traffic to the west out one gate (10 MIT-which we can then run 5 MIT and have TRACON make up the other 5 miles) instead of three gates which we usually do. There was a fourth gate that also required reroutes which were able to depart in between the main group of departures and not be a part of the main departure delays. Since weather often changes; so does opening and closing departure gates. Because of that; we ask ARTCC when an aircraft calls for taxi to put in a reroute on the aircraft to reduce the workload on ARTCC; FD/CD; Ground Control and each pilot so we are not giving pilots more than one reroute.In this particular afternoon; there were approximately 15 aircraft taxing out and ground control was very busy dealing with the reroutes and with a major taxiway closure which made normal taxi routes non-standard both with departing and arriving traffic. Because most of the aircraft were routed out one departure gate; it is normal for ground to taxi all the aircraft on the same SID to the same runway so we can keep delays equally balanced. (First come - first served). Today that runway was Runway XXL. As I was trying to manage each controller's workload; it became every evident that the TRACON was delivering many of their arrivals to Runway XXR and hardly any to Runway XYL. The Local Controller Runway XYR had no less than 15 aircraft on his frequency and the Local Controller Runway XYL had none. There were blocked transmissions on the Runway XX frequency; 2 aircraft answering for one set of instructions and I saw Runway XX Local Control was having to spend too much attention dealing with runway separation between arrivals; crossing the arrivals between departures which could have been spent providing a better service to departures and most importantly increasing safety by not overloading one position and spreading out the workload between two controllers. This I compared to what I saw on the Runway XY Local position. Very few arrivals and literally zero departures. Due to these safety reasons; I felt that approach could help if they ran their arrivals to Runway XY and we could depart Runway XX which would take the pressure off Runway XX controllers as they were dealing with the reroutes and taxiway closure. I looked at the arrival demand and felt that TRACON could definitely help us by placing arrivals to the runway with no departures. I called TRACON Traffic Management Unit to request them after an aircraft on a 15 right base to Runway XXR to start running arrivals to Runway XYL in order to balance the flow and workload for the Tower Controllers. I also stated to the TRACON Traffic Management that if they started to get backed up; they could run to Runway XXR. I felt that even if arriving aircraft were delayed which were inbound; I could justify that due to workload and safety. That simple coordination; turned into a call from TRACON FLM 'you're closing runway XXR for arrivals?' I answered yes. Their response was 'we are opening 'Simos' (Simultaneous Independent Approaches) and we are running to Runway XXR. This totally was reactionary and 'malicious non-compliance.' Visual Approaches were being conducted.Over the next 45 minutes TRACON continued to run approaches to Runway XXR disregarding my directives and actions both as the Tower's FLM and Traffic Manager. I called the Command Center to ask them how I should handle TRACON's non-compliance with the Tower's Traffic Management Initiatives and got involved with a conference call between me; TRACON and the Command Center that made it clear to me that TRACON purposely refused these actions 'because they knew better.' In short; TRACON said 'our job in the tower is easy; clear themto land and the arrivals between the departures.'If I took that attitude; when I got mile-in-trail restrictions from TRACON or ARTCC I would disregard restrictions; clear aircraft for takeoff and say it's a big sky; 1000 and 3/5; deal with it! Is that the culture we want to exemplify? I recommend a cultural change at TRACON both in attitude and safety. Why did TRACON think 'they knew better'? Because if there would have been an accident/incident involved in their malicious non-compliance; the FAA would have bought the farm.




Synopsis: Tower Supervisor/Traffic Management Coordinator advised TRACON to change arrival runway to a different parallel runway due to Tower workload. Tower was issuing weather reroutes and had taxiway closures affecting their normal operation. The TRACON Supervisor refused to comply with the Tower Supervisors' instructions.