The ALPA Contract: How the FAA Privately Funds Its Public Control of Pilots

In September 2020, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) quietly issued a $530,632 contract to the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) under an “Other Transaction Agreement” (OTA). The purpose? To continue ALPA’s central role in administering and supporting the FAA’s Human Intervention Motivation Study, or HIMS.

At first glance, it might seem logical: why not partner with the nation’s largest pilot union to help monitor pilot health and recovery? But a closer look reveals a troubling dynamic—one that calls into question accountability, transparency, and pilot rights in a system that has grown far beyond its original intent.

🧠 HIMS: A Program with No Guardrails

The HIMS Program was created in the 1970s to help pilots return to the cockpit after substance use treatment. But today, it has morphed into an expansive, opaque, and often punitive system. Pilots can be compelled to enter HIMS based on little more than a high BAC, an anonymous report, or vague suspicion.

There is no formal appeal process.
There is no right to a second opinion.
There is no clear endpoint.

📑 What the ALPA Contract Really Funds

The 2020 FAA–ALPA contract (693KA9-20-H-00004) was issued under 49 U.S.C. § 106(l)(6), which allows the FAA to bypass traditional procurement rules. These “Other Transaction Agreements” are typically used for experimental programs—not long-running regulatory frameworks. The contract funds ALPA to:

Coordinate HIMS operations and oversight
Train AMEs, airline reps, and peer monitors
Host workshops and produce policy materials
Support FAA Aerospace Medicine staff

This effectively makes ALPA an enforcement arm of the FAA, even while it claims to represent pilots.

⚠️ Why This Matters

⚖️ No Due Process: Pilots in HIMS have no hearings, no second opinions, and no protections under standard FAA processes.
💼 Conflict of Interest: ALPA oversees a program it promotes to its members while being funded by the FAA.
📉 No Accountability: OTA contracts are exempt from audit or transparency requirements.
🔒 Entrenchment: These contracts bypass Congress and the public rulemaking process.

🚨 It’s Time to Reform the Foundation

This contract is more than a funding line—it signals entrenched policy. At P4HR, we believe:

Programs like HIMS must be science-based, time-limited, and independently overseen.
Pilots deserve appeals, second opinions, and neutral providers.
FAA-union contracts must be publicly transparent.

🔗 Resources

Let’s bring oversight, fairness, and transparency back to pilot health. Because recovery shouldn’t mean surrendering your rights.