FLIGHT ATTENDANTS NOT ALLOWED TO STRIKE

[PRINCESS KIDAGAKASH]

Well, the crooked judge has ruled that airline employees have no right seek self help(strike that is) if their contract is wiped out. This is a VIOLATION of the RLA! Judges cannot simply make up laws as they or NWA sees fit. The Judge was already in violation of the Norris-LaGuardia Act and now with this B.S. ruling has broken the law again!This corrupt judge needs to be arrested and thrown in jail along with Doug Stealin and his NWA cronies. NWA flight attendants had better get striking, IMMEDIATELY! Of course, the AFA is gonna let this judge get away with it and won't do anything. The AFA only wants that dues money and a strike would not bring in any dues money. All airline employees are in serious trouble,if the AFA doesn't do something and do it quick! :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:

 

[groundcontrol]

Does anyone really believe cencus'?
I always lie when I fill one out.

 

[upsilon]

Upsilon, sorry to interrupt your rant on finman, but there are such things as Associate degrees (I should know - I have one along with a B.S. from Purdue). They are usually earned after two years in a field of study. To make themselves more marketable to prospective employers, most people choose to continue on with their education for two more years and receive a Bachelors degree. Anyway, let's get this thread back on topic...

My short post, mischaracterized by you as a "rant", was most assuredly not "on finman", with whose take on NW financial matters I most often agree. I appreciate his posts on this board; but others obviously do not agree with me.

I'm glad to know the basis for an "Associate Degree". As I said above, I may be behind the times. There was no such thing as a Junior College in my day; and thus I had no idea what was the name of the recognition given to one who completed a JC program. It does seem to be a fitting descriptive.

Sorry for the interruption....

 

[jay4jet]

The NWA F/A's should swallow thier pride and honor the AMFA picket line, like they should have done from the get go.

:angry:

 

[jenny@nw]

I'd say $30-$38K per year (based on $30-$38/hr pay rate * 85 hours per month) is a livable wage. The most recent census burea information places a $37,500 income in the 63rd perctentile for those with a HS degree, and in the 46th percentile for those with an associate degree. (To clarify here, the 100th percentile would be the top paying percentile for that education level grouping) This doesn't take into account the fact that FA's only work 12-14 days per month, which is much less than a typical full time job.

Well you don't take in account of the lifestyle, nor how many hours they work that is not paid.

This isn't 12-14 days for eight hours a day. Some days are for example being on duty 16 hrs straight. I've worked 27 hrs on duty before. You bet when that happens to me again I'm walkin'. I think you will see more and more of your frontline workers not caring about their jobs anymore. Not very productive nor are they getting any incentive to do good work. Seems like everywhere you turn someone is reprimanded or is forced to fill out a 20 page report when they fall ill or go to the doctor.

People are starving for money and they are flying 85-90 hrs a month (and you mulitply that by two) 170 divided by 4 is a little over 40 hrs a month. That is how much they are really working, except it is all compacted into those 15 or 20 days (depending on your status)

So if a flight attendant is suppose to do pre departures and not be paid, where is the incientive to do that? Why should they do them? They aren't being paid at all, especially when they are at their homebase. Other places they may be getting $1 and hour for per diem. Oh dont even talk about having maintenance problems at the homebase. oooh.

 

[robbedagain]

id say SCREW THE JUDGE AND SCRAPPY METAL JUNK and STRIKE!!!!!!
That judge must of been paidoff by the corporate a**holes of SCRAPPYMETAL JUNK

 

[eolesen]

The Judge was already in violation of the Norris-LaGuardia Act and now with this B.S. ruling has broken the law again!

Really? The appeals court already ruled that NLGA's general provisions are superceded by the RLA's specific provisions.

Had y'all been a little more supportive of revoking the RLA as it relates to airline employees in favor of being under Taft-Hartley, NLGA would have applied. Then you'd be allowed to strike the moment a contract expired or was arbrogated.

Perhaps this ruling will give unions second thoughts on the wisdom of staying under RLA...

 

[finman]

People are starving for money and they are flying 85-90 hrs a month (and you mulitply that by two) 170 divided by 4 is a little over 40 hrs a month. That is how much they are really working, except it is all compacted into those 15 or 20 days (depending on your status)

So if a flight attendant is suppose to do pre departures and not be paid, where is the incientive to do that? Why should they do them? They aren't being paid at all, especially when they are at their homebase. Other places they may be getting $1 and hour for per diem. Oh dont even talk about having maintenance problems at the homebase. oooh.

What is that math supposed to represent. FA's are paid about 85 hours a month now; how does that convert to them working only 40 hours per month as you state? I'd imagine I'm not the only one confused by that paragraph.

If the FA's wanted to be paid for non-flying activity (duty time in excess of credit time), then they should have negotiated that into their contract in some manner. Naturally, the hourly pay rate would then have to be adusted downward, since you can't very well pay an FA $35/hr if the total paid hours are going to be more in the 140-160 hours per month range, like regular full time employees. That's the reason the hourly rates are so high, because the payable hours end up being so low relative to the amount of time an FA is on duty.

 

[jenny@nw]

What is that math supposed to represent. FA's are paid about 85 hours a month now; how does that convert to them working only 40 hours per month as you state? I'd imagine I'm not the only one confused by that paragraph.

If the FA's wanted to be paid for non-flying activity (duty time in excess of credit time), then they should have negotiated that into their contract in some manner. Naturally, the hourly pay rate would then have to be adusted downward, since you can't very well pay an FA $35/hr if the total paid hours are going to be more in the 140-160 hours per month range, like regular full time employees. That's the reason the hourly rates are so high, because the payable hours end up being so low relative to the amount of time an FA is on duty.

well then I suggest that we get paid the minute we sign in at that payrate until we leave the aircraft to go home at our home base just like any other job.

You obviously don't know our work functions.

When we are sitting away from our homebase on our unproductive 4 hr sits, we are just getting paid per diem and that's it. We can't just go home on our sits (or breaks)like people who work in the office or on the ground.

The math represents all those times we don't get paid when we are working... like sits.... going on the aircraft and preparing the galley.... checking log books.... checking lavs.... breifings.... sitting at the gate..... having breifings outside the gate.... intl 2 hr briefings...checking the safety equipment.... or other things that's lacking like cleaning the aircraft...hanging coats....doing pre departures.... or if there's a delay offering drinks.... helping agents with checks...

Now we don't have groundtime either. Well all I can say is get your own water. :down:

 

[Bear96]

What is that math supposed to represent. FA's are paid about 85 hours a month now; how does that convert to them working only 40 hours per month as you state? I'd imagine I'm not the only one confused by that paragraph.

I think she meant 40 hours per week.

I normally put in 55-60 hours per week. But travelling is (usually) not involved -- it does make a difference being home every night.

 

[Nor'Easta]

So if a flight attendant is suppose to do pre departures and not be paid, where is the incientive to do that? Why should they do them?

Most AA f/a's stopped those when we got the screw job in 2003 by our sell-out union the AAPFA. If someone rings a call light then I do answer it (FAR) if it's not an emergency, I tell them "sorry we have no more pillows, blankets, water or whatever you want."

 

[jenny@nw]

[quote name='Nor'Easta' post='415976' date='Sep 16 2006, 04:30 PM']Most AA f/a's stopped those when we got the screw job in 2003 by our sell-out union the AAPFA. If someone rings a call light then I do answer it (FAR) if it's not an emergency, I tell them "sorry we have no more pillows, blankets, water or whatever you want."[/quote]
You know what they are going to say (I've heard this before) YOU AIRLINES BLAME SEPT 11 for everything. :down:

 

[finman]

well then I suggest that we get paid the minute we sign in at that payrate until we leave the aircraft to go home at our home base just like any other job.

You obviously don't know our work functions.

When we are sitting away from our homebase on our unproductive 4 hr sits, we are just getting paid per diem and that's it. We can't just go home on our sits (or breaks)like people who work in the office or on the ground.

The math represents all those times we don't get paid when we are working... like sits.... going on the aircraft and preparing the galley.... checking log books.... checking lavs.... breifings.... sitting at the gate..... having breifings outside the gate.... intl 2 hr briefings...checking the safety equipment.... or other things that's lacking like cleaning the aircraft...hanging coats....doing pre departures.... or if there's a delay offering drinks.... helping agents with checks...

Now we don't have groundtime either. Well all I can say is get your own water. :down:

I actually know precisely how your work functions; I won't bore you with why. We're basically saying the same thing here. I'm fully aware that the sum total of your duty periods (report time to release time) will likely be roughly double the credit hours you log on a trip. That's how the system was set up, and that's why the hourly pay rate is so high. In my mind, I just use a simple 50% percent conversion when comparing an FA hourly pay rate to a non-crew member pay rate. That presumes that 14 days on the road logging those 85 hours of pay is an equivelant work-life burden as working 8 to 5 for 21 days in a month. For all intents and purposes, let's assume those are equivalant. With that, a top step FA earning $38/hr right now would likely be indifferent going to an 8 to 5 job paying $19/hr. That person would make the same total monthly income.

Would it be more palatable to do all of those unpaid items if they were paid, but your pay rate was cut in half to account for the doubling of your payable hours?

Just out of curiosity, how does this $19/hr top step pay compare to CSAs or ESEs?

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Really? The appeals court already ruled that NLGA's general provisions are superceded by the RLA's specific provisions.

Had y'all been a little more supportive of revoking the RLA as it relates to airline employees in favor of being under Taft-Hartley, NLGA would have applied. Then you'd be allowed to strike the moment a contract expired or was arbrogated.

Perhaps this ruling will give unions second thoughts on the wisdom of staying under RLA...

And just what are you basing the premise that unions wish/let alone have a choice in staying under the RLA?

 

[Kev3188]

Just out of curiosity, how does this $19/hr top step pay compare to CSAs or ESEs?

ESE's:

Base rate (TOS) is $17.88/hr.
Line Pay is .10/hr
ESL (Crew Chief) Override is $1.25/hr.