Results are out: F/A seniority Intergration team

[BoeingBoy]

First, it sounds like this committee was using lists supplied by the companies. Most only update their lists once a year, with those leaving the lists for whatever reason during the year removed when the yearly update is accomplished. For seniority purposes that makes no difference - if someone above you on the list has retired, taken a management position, or whatever, they won't be bidding so can't outbid you for anything.

Second, when the NMB gets involved they will get lists from each side. At that time either side can challenge anyone on the list - AFA representing the NW side and presumably this committee for the DL side. The NMB will have the addresses/phone numbers and investigate the challenged individuals and make a determination. I doubt very seriously that the NMB would release the personal info to just anyone, but the AFA will have their opportunity to remove invalid names from the list of eligible voters.

Jim

 

[tech2101]

And what makes you think DAL FA's will accept any ridiculous AFA cram downs?

Yawn :down:

Because you are only one vote.

 

[Dignity]

First, it sounds like this committee was using lists supplied by the companies.

that would have to be the case correct

Most only update their lists once a year, with those leaving the lists for whatever reason during the year removed when the yearly update is accomplished.

the NW SSN list is updated twice yearly

For seniority purposes that makes no difference - if someone above you on the list has retired, taken a management position, or whatever, they won't be bidding so can't outbid you for anything.

the issue is not necessary the actual bidding, rather than the placement of those onto the actual seniority list prior to the bidding. they have taken their seniority and adjusted for a training credit.., however with overlapping classes have ratio ranked individuals and made some senior to another when in fact one class may have been actually senior(prior to the credit) one number can be the difference between holding the last position on a trip or being assigned reserve. Some are questioning the ratio. It is a recommendation, however without our seniority committee meeting its difficult to have a clear understanding exactly how they determined the ratio, credit or any determination...and no one from our seniority committee is addressing this prior to a vote at all.

Second, when the NMB gets involved they will get lists from each side. At that time either side can challenge anyone on the list - AFA representing the NW side and presumably this committee for the DL side. The NMB will have the addresses/phone numbers and investigate the challenged individuals and make a determination.

most understand how that is handled

I doubt very seriously that the NMB would release the personal info to just anyone

I honestly hope they would know better..

but the AFA will have their opportunity to remove invalid names from the list of eligible voters.

that has been insinuated its not possible, but seems like it actually is..

 

[jalbalpa]

How is AFA supposed to know if someone on the DL list is actually a DL flight attendant and not another name added in by management.


Also, the Delta seniority list was last updated less then 1 month ago.

 

[Dignity]

How is AFA supposed to know if someone on the DL list is actually a DL flight attendant and not another name added in by management.

I would think one suggestion could be actually setting up a meeting..going in and discussing since the topic would be .. Flight Attendant and a Seniority list .. as a start?

 

[jalbalpa]

You think Delta is just going to agree from the bottom of their heart? Really?

Delta management wants us to go and start eh seniority process with the committee. Once we do that, if we dont come to an agreement Delta management can sent the process to arbitration, and if we get involved with the seniority integration Delta management can go to the NMB and force AFA to file a showing of interest within 2 weeks of that time FORCING AFA to have a representational election sooner then what would benefit the membership.

You see how one step leads to another, if AFA simply ignores the Delta committee there is no risk of this happening.

So AFA will ignore the Delta committee and its recommendation until after there is a representational election which will be held after Read Van de Water is replaced. This is not my opinion, this is what the timeline is.

So one step at a time we can work together and ensure our collective bargaining future, this is what is most important to me, this is what is most important to the membership.

Your seniority means nothing without a CBA, seniority is a result of collective bargaining and seniority is actually mentioned 351 times in our CBA.

 

[Kev3188]

an actual number is relevant if the election is determined to be 50 percent plus 1, it is also relevant how many numbers are cast regarding a laker ballot. I am actually surprised you dont see it that way. you just cant guess the number.

What I meant was that it's easy to say "there's xxxx on the NW side, and yyyy on the DL side" and take that as a gospel truth without ensuring that they're valid. How many are on the list isn't as important as how valid each name on the list is.

for an issue this important.. if in fact does take a long time and effort, it should have already been addressed and especially when so much is at stake. now the length of time to actually accomplish that is...irrelevant.

See below:

Second, when the NMB gets involved they will get lists from each side. At that time either side can challenge anyone on the list - AFA representing the NW side and presumably this committee for the DL side. The NMB will have the addresses/phone numbers and investigate the challenged individuals and make a determination. I doubt very seriously that the NMB would release the personal info to just anyone, but the AFA will have their opportunity to remove invalid names from the list of eligible voters.

Jim

 

[Dignity]

You think Delta is just going to agree from the bottom of their heart? Really?

that is a personal opinion

Delta management wants us to go and start eh seniority process with the committee. Once we do that, if we dont come to an agreement Delta management can sent the process to arbitration, and if we get involved with the seniority integration Delta management can go to the NMB and force AFA to file a showing of interest within 2 weeks of that time FORCING AFA to have a representational election sooner then what would benefit the membership.

personal opinion, actually it appears most of the issues would be mutually agreed regarding DOH and training credit..further clarification regarding the ratio is necessary, that requires an actual attempt to meet and discuss...additionally how the entire list was comprised and determined is needing explanation and to be evaluated ensuring fairness for all involved by members of our committee.

You see how one step leads to another, if AFA simply ignores the Delta committee there is no risk of this happening.

personally.. No. that is how you are viewing the situation. ultimately seniority integration and the issues involved should be made completely separate of representation taken out of the hands of those in the union all-together as its own entity...today, I believe seniority integration and representation are completely separate based on the omnibus bill that was made law...once again an organization is determining how integration will be determined, in this case a refusal to even discuss the issue prior to a vote.. the idea to actually refuse to meet and discuss a seniority list especially with a law in place..that allows another group the right to arbitration if they feel it is necessary.. is wrong. it is the principle involved. I am wondering why you have not taken that into consideration...at all.

So AFA will ignore the Delta committee and its recommendation until after there is a representational election which will be held after Read Van de Water is replaced. This is not my opinion, this is what the timeline is.

seniority integration is to be delayed because of a woman needing to be replaced from the NMB?

So one step at a time we can work together and ensure our collective bargaining future, this is what is most important to me, this is what is most important to the membership.

"what is most important to me" that pretty much sums it up..other views should be taken into consideration..especially in a democracy.

Your seniority means nothing without a CBA, seniority is a result of collective bargaining and seniority is actually mentioned 351 times in our CBA.

that has absolutely nothing to do with integration meetings..how does that relate to meeting regarding seniority integration? how can you guarantee the committee will not just put their stamp of approval on the recommendation of a combined list immediately after we have voted? does the omnibus bill made law that enables the right to arbitration.. forfeit a groups right(for any group..any time in the future) if once again a policy rules the day..after an election?

its not that I do not see most of what you are writing.. its simply the actual refusal to meet..is wrong.

 

[Dignity]

What I meant was that it's easy to say "there's xxxx on the NW side, and yyyy on the DL side" and take that as a gospel truth without ensuring that they're valid. How many are on the list isn't as important as how valid each name on the list is.

when that is complete, there is a specific number.

See below

there is a timeline to determine all those factors and an actual verification process. again.. that in itself is irrelevant (the timeline) regarding however long it takes to make sure it is done right.. is the point.

 

[Dignity]

And what makes you think DAL FA's will accept any ridiculous AFA cram downs?

Yawn :down:

Dapoes,

theoretically I am a passenger, for all you know I am...do you think those are the best words you could choose....to....

oooh nevermind..

 

[BoeingBoy]

the NW SSN list is updated twice yearly

Same thing applies - the NW list is just accurate twice a year instead of once. Between updates there will almost certainly be names on the list that have retired, quit, gone to management, etc. Still makes no difference bidding-wise since those people aren't there to bid.

they have taken their seniority and adjusted for a training credit.., however with overlapping classes have ratio ranked individuals and made some senior to another when in fact one class may have been actually senior(prior to the credit)

To me personally, the only fair way is to put everyone on the same standard for hire date first, then combine the lists. If one side's hire date is based on start of training while the other side's is based on completion of training, one or the other should have their date adjusted to match the other side's. To do otherwise is to penalize those whose date of hire is later although they started training at the same time. If the training was the same length for DL & NW, it matters not whether you use start of training or end of training for everyone. If one side has longer training than the other, it would make sense to me to use start of training.

As you say, what to do when each side has a class with the same adjusted date of hire (regardless of whether start of training or end of training is used for both groups). If both sides used age to establish seniority within new hire classes, that could be used for the combination of the two classes that had the same hire date - the senior person would be the one who was oldest of both classes, the junior person would be the person who was the youngest of both classes. The two classes could be combined by ratio based on their relative size - combining classes of 80 and 100 you'd take 4 from one side, 5 from the other, 4 from the first, etc. Assuming that there might be several instances of DL & NW classes with the same hire date, you could put the class from one side first for the first instance, the class from the other side first the second instance, and so on. The two sides should work out a method that both consider reasonable.

Jim

 

[dapoes]

Dapoes,

theoretically I am a passenger, for all you know I am...do you think those are the best words you could choose....to....

oooh nevermind..

Absolutely...yes! And as you the passenger, I would then explain what AFA is trying to cram down DAL's throat. In a pleasant manner of course...

 

[Dignity]

Same thing applies - the NW list is just accurate twice a year instead of once. Between updates there will almost certainly be names on the list that have retired, quit, gone to management, etc. Still makes no difference bidding-wise since those people aren't there to bid.

yes that is true and makes sense..

To me personally, the only fair way is to put everyone on the same standard for hire date first, then combine the lists.....

Thanks Jim, thats pretty well thought out..

 

[Dignity]

Absolutely...yes! And as you the passenger, I would then explain what AFA is trying to cram down DAL's throat. In a pleasant manner of course...

theoretically I am a passenger.. and I am sitting here holding my jacket and have made a beverage request twice ..while you are standing there mouthing off your personal problems(in the most pleasant manner of course...), ya think you could hold that thought, hang this jacket and bring me something to drink?

kidding!

 

[dapoes]

theoretically I am a passenger.. and I am sitting here holding my jacket and have made a beverage request twice ..while you are standing there mouthing off your personal problems(in the most pleasant manner of course...), ya think you could hold that thought, hang this jacket and bring me something to drink since I have asked twice?
kidding!