Air Traffic Controllers May Be Committing a Felony By Calling Out Sick
But a shortage of employees means government isn't in the driver's seat
If air traffic controllers are willing to violate their affidavits and core job duties during a shutdown, should they be entrusted with these life-or-death responsibilities at all, even in normal times?
In the midst of the ongoing 2025 government shutdown, travelers across the United States are facing a wave of flight disruptions, with thousands of cancellations and delays piling up at major airports.
The root cause? A surge in air traffic controllers (ATCs) calling in sick, even though they aren’t ill, straining an already overburdened system to the breaking point.
These essential workers, employed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), are classified as “excepted” employees, meaning they must continue performing their duties even without immediate paychecks during funding lapses.
Read on for details.
It’s easy to sympathize with the plight of these controllers. Working high-stress jobs that demand split-second decisions to keep skies safe, they’re now expected to show up without the guarantee of timely compensation, even though they will be paid when the government reopens. Many Americans might nod in understanding, viewing these sick calls as a human response to an unfair situation imposed by political gridlock in Washington D.C..
As financial pressures mount—bills don’t stop coming, even if salaries do.
However, this sympathy overlooks a critical commitment these professionals make upon entering the field. All federal employees, including ATCs, are required to sign Standard Form 61 (SF-61), the Appointment Affidavit. This sworn document explicitly states that they will not participate in any strike against the U.S. government and acknowledges the unique nature of their roles in public safety. Federal law (5 U.S.C. § 7311) reinforces this, prohibiting strikes or similar actions that could endanger lives and infrastructure.
While genuine illness is protected under sick leave policies, coordinated “sickouts”—mass absences that mimic strikes—cross into prohibited territory. The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) echoes this in their guidelines, emphasizing that job actions violating federal law are off-limits. During past shutdowns, such as in 2018-2019, similar patterns emerged, prompting warnings from officials about potential disciplinary measures or loss of backpay for illegitimate absences.
Violators of the no-strike oath can be prosecuted under federal criminal law, whether it’s breaking that oath by striking, organizing a sick-out, or refusing to show up. That’s a felony.
Some in the media are covering the issue in a one-sided fashion, understandably sympathetic towards the plight of the controllers, but failing to report on the other side of the story or even verifying the information they are reporting. In fact, news reports are reporting on air traffic control employees supposedly facing “imminent eviction,” even though the eviction process takes months and is appealable. Experts say anyone facing immediate eviction would be in that situation based on previous nonpayment of rent; not from ten days without pay (since October 28 paycheck).
This raises profound questions about accountability and trust in our aviation system. If air traffic controllers are willing to violate their affidavits and core job duties during a shutdown, should they be entrusted with these life-or-death responsibilities at all, even in normal times? What might these agents do at our expense—perhaps cut corners on safety protocols or engage in other subtle disruptions—when personal grievances arise outside of fiscal crises? And crucially, should those found to be abusing sick leave in a coordinated manner be prosecuted under federal anti-strike laws, to deter future risks to public safety?
It’s a touchy issue because there’s already a longstanding shortage of air traffic controllers. If the government tries to enforce their agreement, or prosecute violators, it could reduce the already strained force.
As the shutdown drags on, these aren’t just hypothetical concerns; they’re a call for reflection on the integrity of those who hold our skies in their hands.
Resolving the funding impasse is urgent intros respect, but so is ensuring that the guardians of air travel uphold their oaths, shutdown or not.
I've been saying this exact thing. It's literally something they agree to by signing that form with hiring paperwork. If they breach the agreement there must be a disciplinary action taken. At a private company there would be.
No employee in government ever is held to the standards of those of us working in the private world. It's unacceptable. And when one does it they all do it.
When Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation asked Sean Duffy if he was planning on firing any of the air traffic controllers for calling in sick and he said no, like no way, I thought, wow! So they can just break their agreement, call in sick, and still get paid for all of the time the government was shut down when it opens back up?? I mean, that's crazy! They have not a fear in the world that they could lose their jobs. They aren't setting a good example and I don't like that attitude at all.
Cheryl, let's ask the bigger question. Slavery and indentured servitude are more clearly felonies than claiming sick leave due to stress from having to work second jobs and deal with unpaid bills. By your logic, Democrats are returning to their slave holding roots and committing felonies by refusing to pay controllers. In your words, by extension, Democrat Senators who vote down government funding are untrustworthy and should be removed from office.