FAA Moves to Fire Two LaGuardia Controllers Over Alleged Timecard Fraud

NEW YORK — The Federal Aviation Administration is moving to fire two air traffic controllers who allegedly left the New York LaGuardia Airport (LGA) tower about an hour before their shifts ended on the night of the fatal March 22 runway collision, ABC News reported, citing an FAA review first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

The allegation is a payroll and conduct matter. The agency has not said the departures affected who was working, or what they were working, when Air Canada Express Flight AC8646 struck an airport fire truck later that night.

What the FAA Alleges

The FAA treats a controller who clocks out before the end of a scheduled shift as having committed timecard fraud. Inside the workforce the practice has its own name, an "early shove," and ABC7 New York, summarizing the Journal's account, reported that it occurs often enough at short-staffed facilities to function as an informal concession after a demanding shift.

Controllers at understaffed facilities routinely work six-day weeks, and an hour surrendered early transfers to whoever stays.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said a small share of controllers "unfairly add additional work to their fellow controllers, and impact the airspace." He added: "We will not tolerate fraud, and we are taking appropriate action to hold folks accountable."

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association, which represents FAA controllers, has not contested or endorsed the allegations publicly. The Canadian Press reported the union's statement that it "is actively discussing these allegations with FAA leadership," and that "those discussions are the appropriate forum for addressing the matter."

Neither controller has been named, and the FAA has not said on the record whether either remains on an operational position while the action proceeds.

What the Discipline Does Not Establish

The FAA action rests on when two people went home. The collision investigation rests on what happened on runway 4 at 23:37 EDT, and the NTSB has not connected the two.

The preliminary report published April 23 describes two controllers on duty in the LaGuardia tower that night, a complement the board recorded as standard for the shift. One worked local control. The other worked ground control while serving as controller-in-charge, and in the minutes before the collision was occupied with a separate emergency involving another aircraft. That left the local controller transmitting on both the ground and local frequencies.

Whether the earlier departures removed coverage that would otherwise have overlapped that period is the question that would link the employment action to the accident. No published FAA or NTSB document reviewed for this article answers it.

What the Preliminary Report Established

Investigators have released a sequence, not a cause. AVweb's account of the preliminary report records the landing clearance for the CRJ-900 at 23:35:07. At 23:37:04, with the jet roughly 130 ft above the ground on final approach, the controller cleared "Truck 1 and company" to cross runway 4 at taxiway D. Stop transmissions went out at 23:37:12 and again at 23:37:20. The vehicle's speed increased. Impact came about two seconds after the nose gear touched down.

Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X generated no conflict alert either: none of the seven emergency response vehicles moving on the field carried transponders, and the system could not distinguish them as separate targets.

Flight AC8646 was operated by Jazz Aviation (QK) for Air Canada (AC) using a CRJ-900, registration C-GNJZ, arriving from Montréal–Trudeau International Airport (YUL). Seventy-six people were aboard, and two Port Authority firefighters were in the truck. Both pilots were killed. Across the aircraft and the vehicle, 39 people were taken to hospitals, six of them with serious injuries.

What Happens Next

The NTSB investigation, DCA26MA161, remains open, and the board's preliminary findings are subject to change. A final report with probable cause has not been published.

The disciplinary case runs on a separate track, through FAA employment procedures and the discussions NATCA has confirmed with agency leadership.