Guam - More and more concerns are being raised about a certified technical professional study that was conducted at the Guam International Airport Authority.  While upper management is hopeful board members will approve the study, today airport police personnel filed a grievance, asking management and the board to hold off on implementing the study until their concerns have been addressed.

Just because they are receiving a 10% pay raise, mandated by Public Law 29-105, every year until they've received a 40% increase, airport police officers contend they should have been included in the GIAA CTP study.  In a grievance filed with their chain of command leading up to airport management and even including the Attorney General's Office, the officers contend that should the board choose to implement the CTP study during Thursday's board meeting, it may constitute an illegal act.

In fact, the officers have asked that a decision on the implementation be withheld until their concerns are addressed. They assert they were "unfairly and illegally removed from the CTP study" simply because they are receiving additional pay.  But Airport Executive Manager Carlos Salas says their concerns have already been addressed.

While he admits GIAA officers are classified as certified technical professional positions, Salas says the same law that gave them the 40% pay raise also ensures that they along with airport aircraft rescue firefighters are included in the government's hay study.  While the CTP is on tomorrow's agenda, whether or not, the board will take action to implement the study remains to be seen.

"You have some employees who are getting 0.5% increase and you have some of them getting 30% increases so you know we've got this going on and I'm hoping we can get a little bit closer if possible," said Tony Sgro, the chairman of the board's subcommittee that is reviewing the CTP.  

He admits the GIAA board is struggling to find parity in the study as there have been discussions and a push to implement the second percentile market which would result in the airport executive manager, deputy, terminal manager, and airport services manager receiving $20,000-$35,000 raises.

"That's one of the reasons why the board hasn't really acted on this," Sgro said, adding, "I do feel that there were problems with the study what bothered me is that there was an attempt to try to approve this study and then fix it."

Sgro says the board must also weigh the impacts of implementing the study with the need for capital improvement projects and general maintenance at the airport facility, meeting obligations for its bond covenants, as well figure in JAL's recent bankruptcy filing that equates to 20-22% of the airport's income.  He noted, "The board is looking at every single possibility to try to do and do what is right for everyone and believe me we are turning over every single stone before we cast our votes to make that decision."

Sgro adds that his committee is not ready to submit its report to the entire board as they are still waiting on an opinion from the airport's legal counsel. Meanwhile, the board is scheduled to meet at three o'clock tomorrow afternoon.