F/A TA comes out in Drips

Blackdog

Member
Aug 24, 2002
81
0
www.usaviation.com
[color="#FF0000sizeo5span stylefontsize18ptlineheight100sizeo"]I really didn't think it would be this bad but low and behold it is. Only 3 weeks vacation for the most senior employees, are they joking? And to top it all off, vacation is only worth 21 hours per week. Not even worth a 3-day Asia trip. Sick time paid at 75% but they take 100% out of your sick bank. This is geting my big fat NO even before I read the rest of the garbage. Of course we all will vote no and the judge will just impose in on us anyway as he did with out "temporary" pay cuts. JUST SAY NO!!!![/color]
 
[color="#FF0000sizeo5span stylefontsize18ptlineheight100sizeo"]I really didn't think it would be this bad but low and behold it is. Only 3 weeks vacation for the most senior employees, are they joking? And to top it all off, vacation is only worth 21 hours per week. Not even worth a 3-day Asia trip. Sick time paid at 75% but they take 100% out of your sick bank. This is geting my big fat NO even before I read the rest of the garbage. Of course we all will vote no and the judge will just impose in on us anyway as he did with out "temporary" pay cuts. JUST SAY NO!!!![/color]

Lets hope that the NW Flight Attendants vote YES to authorize a strike. That way when that crappy TA is shot down with a NO vote and the judge makes your life even worse, you can STRIKE!
 
[color="#FF0000sizeo5span stylefontsize18ptlineheight100sizeo"]I really didn't think it would be this bad but low and behold it is. Only 3 weeks vacation for the most senior employees, are they joking? And to top it all off, vacation is only worth 21 hours per week. Not even worth a 3-day Asia trip. Sick time paid at 75% but they take 100% out of your sick bank. This is geting my big fat NO even before I read the rest of the garbage. Of course we all will vote no and the judge will just impose in on us anyway as he did with out "temporary" pay cuts. JUST SAY NO!!!![/color]
O.K., next T/A will be 1 1/2 weeks vacation time, and sick time 35%. Life has its' pleasures.
 
[color="#FF0000sizeo5span stylefontsize18ptlineheight100sizeo"]I really didn't think it would be this bad but low and behold it is. Only 3 weeks vacation for the most senior employees, are they joking? And to top it all off, vacation is only worth 21 hours per week. Not even worth a 3-day Asia trip. Sick time paid at 75% but they take 100% out of your sick bank. This is geting my big fat NO even before I read the rest of the garbage. Of course we all will vote no and the judge will just impose in on us anyway as he did with out "temporary" pay cuts. JUST SAY NO!!!![/color]
It should be noted, though, that a typical F/A that is flying all month is only on duty for about 14 days during the month. As such, 3 weeks (15 or 21 days, I'm not sure which conversion to use) of vacation is equivelant to more than a full month of vacation, which is typical for a senior employee in other fields.

With a 14 day work month (compared to a 21-22 day work-month for most jobs), it seems like getting any vacation at all is kind of a bonus.
 
Nice try at some sort of explanation. You fail to reflect that F/A schedules aren't built to do all the flying in a row. They come with days off in between. That way you don't get a month and a half off with 3 weeks vacation. You get 3 weeks as it says. Now your pay depends on what type of schedule you hold during said 3 week vacation. This is where seniority is key. Makes a big difference in the money and time off you get for the 3 weeks. In any event, F/A's don't get 21 days of trip removal with pay. That would be great. Maybe next time ask someone that might actually know what they are talking about.
 
Nice try at some sort of explanation. You fail to reflect that F/A schedules aren't built to do all the flying in a row. They come with days off in between. That way you don't get a month and a half off with 3 weeks vacation. You get 3 weeks as it says. Now your pay depends on what type of schedule you hold during said 3 week vacation. This is where seniority is key. Makes a big difference in the money and time off you get for the 3 weeks. In any event, F/A's don't get 21 days of trip removal with pay. That would be great. Maybe next time ask someone that might actually know what they are talking about.
Don't you bid on a set of days for your vacation, and then you're paid a set amount of hours per day of vacation(3 hrs per day or something in that area)? Maybe I'm wrong, but I was assuming it's similar to the way pilots bid and are paid vacation.

Regardless, I was more getting to the point that with a 14 day work-month, vacation is likely something that was offered up in heavy doses in exchange for lesser pay cuts and no outsourcing. Obviously, that drives a significant reduction in headcount, but at least it's not losing jobs to those evil foreigners.
 
Don't you bid on a set of days for your vacation, and then you're paid a set amount of hours per day of vacation(3 hrs per day or something in that area)? Maybe I'm wrong, but I was assuming it's similar to the way pilots bid and are paid vacation.
No, I don't know what you are referring to, but if NW vacation pay is anything like AA, you never get paid for every vacation day.
Example: (Let's use February where there are exactly 4 weeks in the month.) Now, we bid for 02AB (first two weeks of Feb or 02CD (last two weeks of FEB).
Assume you hold 02AB, and the month starts on Sunday, the 1st and you have 2 weeks vacation accrued.

You have a 3-day trip on the 3-5, another 3-day trip on 9-12. You only get paid for the six days, 3-5 and 9-12. Granted you get paid the actual value of those trips rather than some pre-set amount/day.

If you are on reserve during the month of February, you might get paid for more days depending upon your reserve availability pattern. If you are good for 1-5, 10-14, you would be paid so much per day for 10 days.

Any vacation day that falls on an otherwise "day off" whether reserve or lineholder, is a donation back to the company. You are not paid for that day.

Regardless, I was more getting to the point that with a 14 day work-month, vacation is likely something that was offered up in heavy doses in exchange for lesser pay cuts and no outsourcing. Obviously, that drives a significant reduction in headcount, but at least it's not losing jobs to those evil foreigners.

Maybe, but I wouldn't call a month broken up with 3 days on, 2-4 days off, 3 days on, 2-4 days off, etc easy. I held a line last year of nothing but turns (out in the morning, back in the afternoon/evening). Scheduling built the line with 1 day on, 2 days off, all month. I'm a commuter to STL, and the sign-in was too early to commute up the day of the trip, and I got back too late to get the last flight to DFW. So, I would have had to devote part or all of 3 days for each one day trip. Fortunately, I was able to trade or drop some of the trips, but nevertheless it was a brutal schedule.

P.S. When talking about f/as "only" working 14 days a month, that ain't hard and fast, or a particularly easy month. An office worker at a 9-5 job "only" works about 19 days in February. Other months, he/she works 20-23 days, and is home every night and has a set schedule that doesn't change throughout the day due to mechanicals, weather, etc.
 
1) No, I don't know what you are referring to, but if NW vacation pay is anything like AA, you never get paid for every vacation day.
Example: (Let's use February where there are exactly 4 weeks in the month.) Now, we bid for 02AB (first two weeks of Feb or 02CD (last two weeks of FEB).
Assume you hold 02AB, and the month starts on Sunday, the 1st and you have 2 weeks vacation accrued.

You have a 3-day trip on the 3-5, another 3-day trip on 9-12. You only get paid for the six days, 3-5 and 9-12. Granted you get paid the actual value of those trips rather than some pre-set amount/day.

If you are on reserve during the month of February, you might get paid for more days depending upon your reserve availability pattern. If you are good for 1-5, 10-14, you would be paid so much per day for 10 days.

Any vacation day that falls on an otherwise "day off" whether reserve or lineholder, is a donation back to the company. You are not paid for that day.
Maybe, but I wouldn't call a month broken up with 3 days on, 2-4 days off, 3 days on, 2-4 days off, etc easy. I held a line last year of nothing but turns (out in the morning, back in the afternoon/evening). Scheduling built the line with 1 day on, 2 days off, all month. I'm a commuter to STL, and the sign-in was too early to commute up the day of the trip, and I got back too late to get the last flight to DFW. So, I would have had to devote part or all of 3 days for each one day trip. Fortunately, I was able to trade or drop some of the trips, but nevertheless it was a brutal schedule.

2) P.S. When talking about f/as "only" working 14 days a month, that ain't hard and fast, or a particularly easy month. An office worker at a 9-5 job "only" works about 19 days in February. Other months, he/she works 20-23 days, and is home every night and has a set schedule that doesn't change throughout the day due to mechanicals, weather, etc.
1) I see, so the value of the vacation period will vary depending on what you were scheduled to fly for that vacation period. One thing confuses me. Don't you bid on your vacation several months in advance, all at once in Sep or Oct of the year prior to the year in question. Also, don't you bid on your flying schedule for a particular month in the month prior to the bid month? I'm just trying to understand how you couldn't bid 2 weeks of vacation in the first half of Feb, and then in January when you're bidding your February schedule, select a front loaded schedule so your vacation would be worth more. It sounds too easy, so I must be missing something.

2) I realize that it's not a standard work-day, so work-month comparisons to office jobs are not completely apples to apples. Nevertheless, I think the commuter example probably isn't the best comparison either. Although commuting is common, it is a perk that most could never enjoy. As such, any schedule hardships brought on by choosing to live in a city other than where you're stationed might ring hollow to the non-crew world. Regardless, the 14 day FA month vs 21 day regular work-month may get condensed to a 16 vs 21 when you factor in the long hours on the road and living in hotels away from home. Even though I think this type of lifestyle was once a key draw to being an FA, the demographics of the workforce have changed from the "young, single, want to see the world" group that this job is probably more suited to.

All that being said, it seems that vacation time is probably one of those items that should pretty easy to let go, since FA's already have so many additional days off compared to a non-crew employee.
 
Easy to say when its not your vacation. Im sure theres more to the t/a than just loss of vacation. JMHO.
 
Nice try at some sort of explanation. You fail to reflect that F/A schedules aren't built to do all the flying in a row. They come with days off in between. That way you don't get a month and a half off with 3 weeks vacation. You get 3 weeks as it says. Now your pay depends on what type of schedule you hold during said 3 week vacation. This is where seniority is key. Makes a big difference in the money and time off you get for the 3 weeks. In any event, F/A's don't get 21 days of trip removal with pay. That would be great. Maybe next time ask someone that might actually know what they are talking about.
As a former F/A I was always surprised at the benefits of such a job. It is a gravy job, there really should be no benefits as it is a thinkless career.
 
Easy to say when its not your vacation. Im sure theres more to the t/a than just loss of vacation. JMHO.
No, just common sense.

Obviously there's more to it than vacation, but they likely gave up a lot of vacation in place of larger pay cuts and outsourcing. As you remember, they had to acheive the targeted savings, and it was largely up to the FA union on how they wanted to get to those savings. I'd presume that FA's would rather be paid more for working and keep jobs with the domestic union rather than maintain the vacation structure they had. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how I would read it.

Also keep in mind the difference between management vacation and union vacation. The vacation allotted to a workforce of this size drives incremental staffing. (I.E., simplistically, if there is on average 500 FA's on vacation at any given time, then you need to employ 500 extra FA's to cover the same amount of flying). Management vacation does not drive that incremental headcount, as we are expected to take our vacation at times where our absence can be covered by existing resources. That doesn't make either vacation better or worse than the other, but I thought it might be helpful to explain the economic distinction.