1. Kansas City International Airport, Kansas City, MO
2. San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, CA
3. Jackson Hole Airport, Jackson Hole, WY
We've uncovered the lengthy document outlining the requirements that contractors bidding for an SPP airport are required to meet.
In the Contract agreement, TSA outlines in gory detail what is required of prospective contractors, including things such as how many yellow highlighters they will consume. What is most interesting is the ATSA comparison wage rates for 2010 on page 76. According to this chart, TSOs at pay band E should be making $61,422.16 a year to include the TSA Fringe. The TSA Fringe would be our benefits such as health and dental, etc. Note that these rates do not include 10 and 25 percent shift premium for working nights and Sundays, respectively.
Yet, TSA seems to contradict themselves when they are asked about this in the Q&A from prospective vendors. TSA states, "TSA's interpretation of ATSA compensation requirements are outlined in the solicitation. Each offeror may approach hiring and compensation as it sees fit based on the requirements outlined in the solicitation and subsequent contract."
When the question is about the premium shift pay, they refer the vendors to a broken URL.
The most fascinating thing about the Q&A is this question:
52.222-41(f) requires that a successor contractor pay wages and fringe benefits (including accrued wages and benefits and prospective increases) to service employees at least equal to those agreed upon by a predecessor contractor when the services to be furnished under the proposed contract will be substantially the same as services being furnished by an incumbent contractor whose contract the proposed contract will succeed. We note that there are SCA covered positions at SFO under a Collective Bargaining Agreement. Therefore, our understanding is that all bidders would be required to price these positions to the CBA rate. Given this, how does TSA intend to ensure that this requirement of federal law is met?TSA's response is, "The government will ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations as necessary and in accordance with applicable policies." So if our understanding is correct, and we're opened to the possibility that we're not, then this would mean that if a new contractor were to take over, they would be required to honor our current and future wages and benefits.
A lot of the questions have to do with SFO and our CBA. It's understandable. Of the three airports, SFO is the biggest contract. So naturally, prospective contractors want to know specifics on our airport and its operations. Yet, TSA is unwilling to get in to too many specifics. Most of the answers are that that information is privy to the current contractor, i.e. Covenant Aviation Security.
One of the pressing questions we have, of all the SPP airports why these three in special contention? Is TSA determined to have new contractors for these airports or is this just a dog and pony show? Only time will answer these questions. We will just have to wait for the bridge contract signed in August to expire to get the answers to these questions.
We have uploaded all three relevant documents to Google docs. The contractor requirements is quite lengthy and a lot of it is useless information, but it's still a fascinating perusal. You can download the contractor requirements here. The first Q&A here, and the second Q&A here.
