Southwest F/a's Working Free

skyflyr69

Senior
Dec 11, 2002
439
13
> Subject: southwest f/a's don't get paid enough
>
> Contact Us | Advertise | Home Delivery | Site Map | Print Edition |
> ServicesBecome a mySun member | Login
> Search: Site Web
> HOME | MARYLAND | NATION/WORLD | BUSINESS | SPORTS | ARTS/LIFE |
> OPINION
> | MARKETPLACE
> business
> Employees of 'fun' airline aren't amused
> Flight attendants say pay at Southwest is lacking; Negotiating contract
> for 2 years; Hours of unpaid tasks are routine, union says
> By Stacey Hirsh
> Sun Staff
> Originally published February 29, 2004
> After a MASH television show-themed company holiday party several years
> ago, Southwest Airlines chairman and founder Herb Kelleher strolled out
> to an airplane hangar to visit the maintenance crew in his Corporal
> Klinger costume - a long, lacey, pink dress with a floppy purple hat
> and
> gloves.
> Risque, perhaps, for a typical company, but Southwest is anything but
> typical. Employees wear sandals and Hawaiian shirts to work for tacky
> tourist day.
>
> The airline's stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the
> ticker LUV, apropos of its nickname as the "love" airline. The workers'
> shenanigans have even become fodder for a reality television show that
> chronicles the inner workings of the airline business.
>
> "When you have a tone set at that level, you feel like you have a lot
> of
> freedom to have fun with your co-workers and your customers," said
> Ginger Hardage, a company spokeswoman.
>
> But behind the goofs and gags of the airline that makes flying a little
> less serious, flight attendants paint a much different portrait: that
> of
> an unfair employer.
>
> The airline's flight attendants, who have been negotiating a new
> contract for nearly two years, say they are working hundreds of unpaid
> hours each year. They also say they earn below the industry average,
> while other Southwest employees are better compensated for their work.
>
> Flight attendants complain that they're not paid for time spent on such
> tasks as security checks, assisting disabled travelers or children
> flying alone, helping with luggage and cleaning the airplane between
> flights. They work an estimated 23 unpaid hours per month, they say.
>
> "Is there any other work force that goes to work five days a week and
> is
> only paid 3 1/2 days?" asked Cuyler Thompson, a Southwest flight
> attendant for nine years, during recent picketing outside
> Baltimore-Washington International Airport. "And we sing little songs
> to
> be happy about it."
>
> Southwest said it is eager to reach a contract agreement with the 7,200
> flight attendants. The company believes the workers deserve a new
> contract and pay increases, Hardage said.
>
> "We have presented a contract, and we hope the union will provide that
> directly to the flight attendants," Hardage said. "It's with
> industry-leading pay raises, profitability bonuses, stock options and
> other features that we believe our flight attendants deserve."
>
> Details of the proposed contract have not been made public.
>
> While many airlines struggle in a post-Sept. 11, 2001, price-war
> environment, Southwest turned a profit last year for its 31st
> consecutive year.
>
> Last month, the airline reported a net income of $442 million, or 54
> cents per diluted share, in 2003 - compared with a net income of $241
> million, or 30 cents per diluted share, in 2002. The airline had
> revenue
> of $5.9 billion in 2003, up from $5.5 billion in 2002.
>
> With business prospering, Southwest workers such as mechanics and
> pilots
> have seen their contracts improve, said Robert Mann, president of R.W.
> Mann & Co. Inc., an industry analyst in New York.
>
> The corporate culture at Southwest is, within the air industry,
> famously
> relaxed: Flight attendants may wear tennis shoes and walking shorts to
> work, pilots wear leather bomber jackets. When flight attendants go
> over
> safety procedures at the beginning of each flight, their lines are
> often
> delivered with a joke. Company executives once settled a battle with
> another company over an advertising slogan by holding an arm-wrestling
> match.
>
> "We like to say, 'We take the competition seriously, but we don't take
> ourselves seriously,' " Hardage said.
>
> The attitude at Southwest is so unusual that the A&E television channel
> launched a reality show on Monday nights that follows Southwest workers
> in their travels across the country.
>
> The program, Airline, portrays Southwest workers in their daily jobs,
> from manning a flight carrying penguins in the cabin to conducting an
> impromptu version of The Price Is Right while in flight in honor of a
> female passenger en route to Los Angeles to fulfill her lifelong dream
> of being on the game show.
>
> "The great thing about Southwest was that they are known for their
> antics: They've sort of put the fun back in airline travel," said
> Patrice Andrews, a supervising producer for the A&E program. "It's
> given
> us a great opportunity for more fun stories and for us to really
> develop
> their employees as characters."
>
> With more than 34,000 employees, Southwest's edge over other airlines
> comes not from its antics but from its low fares and frequent service,
> experts point out. To maintain that advantage, the airline must sustain
> its high productivity, said David Swierenga, president of AeroEcon, an
> aviation consulting firm in Vienna, Va.
>
> Southwest employees' pay is about average with the rest of the
> industry,
> Swierenga said. But for the same money, Southwest's workers are
> typically more productive than those at other airlines, he said.
>
> "If you're a 737 pilot at Southwest, you make as much money as a 737
> pilot at US Airways, maybe more, but you will fly more in order to earn
> that pay," Swierenga said.
>
> But Southwest's flight attendants argue otherwise.
>
> Thom McDaniel, president of the Transport Workers Union Local 556,
> which
> represents all Southwest Airlines' flight attendants, said that his
> members earn 20 to 30 percent less than the rest of the industry.
>
> A starting flight attendant at Southwest makes about $14,000 a year, he
> said. The median salary for a Southwest flight attendant is $24,000,
> typically after about seven years on the job.
>
> Flight attendants customarily get paid for time spent in the air - from
> the moment the cabin door closes to when it opens after landing, said
> Dawn Deeks, a spokeswoman for the Association of Flight Attendants in
> Washington.
>
> "You don't get paid for your preflight briefings, you don't get paid
> for
> your layovers, you don't get paid for your time in between flights, you
> don't get paid when you report to the airport before work," Deeks said.
>
> Hardage, the Southwest spokeswoman, said the work that flight
> attendants
> do on the ground is taken into consideration in the way pay is
> structured. She added that the company has always given its employees
> job security and the freedom to be themselves at work.
>
> "Southwest has a philosophy of putting its employees first, and that is
> something that has been a mission since our very founding - that
> employees come first and if you treat employees well, they will in turn
> treat the customers well," Hardage said.
>
> The labor dispute hasn't hurt Southwest's operations, analysts said.
> And
> despite picketing last month at six airports around the country,
> including BWI, workers interviewed said they love their jobs. But they
> also say that it's tough to keep up the playful culture their employer
> is known for with a labor dispute in the backdrop.
>
> Dan McGuire, a flight attendant at Southwest for nearly five years,
> said
> that on a recent three-day trip with stops in Nashville. Tenn., and
> Indianapolis, he worked eight unpaid hours. He spends his time between
> flights taking care of children traveling alone and cleaning the
> airplane - discarding banana peels, even dirty diapers left in seat
> pockets.
>
> "We're the hardest-working flight attendants in the industry. We're the
> best airline in the world, and we're not getting paid," he said. "It's
> hard to keep working and keep up the culture if we don't feel valued.
> We
> feel like the stepchildren of the industry."
>
>
>
> Copyright © 2004, The Baltimore Sun | Get home delivery
> Talk about it E-mail it Print it Contact us
>
> Talk about it
> E-mail it
> Print it
> Contact us
> Also see
> Business
>> Investing
>> Real Estate
>> Technology
> Columnists
>> Eileen Ambrose
>> Jay Hancock
>> Mike Himowitz
>> Kathy Kristof
> Top business headlines
> • Juiced up
> • Inflation worse to those on flat income
> • Your 'dividend' may not qualify for last year's lower tax rates
> • Dividend tax cut brings its share of confusion
> • Wall Street advisers at center of Disney struggle
> Top baltimoresun.com headlines
> • Primary race catches fire finally in Md.
> • As past rushes back, all at risk
> • Aristide bows to pressure, leaves Haiti (7:41 AM)
> • U.S. search for bin Laden gathers steam
> • Explosion on tanker off Virginia coast kills at least three
> baltimoresun.com > business
> back to top
>
>
>
> Technology | Investing | Real Estate | Stocks
> Home | Maryland | Nation/World | Business | Sports | Arts/Life |
> Opinion
> | Marketplace
>
> Contact us: Submit feedback, send a letter to the editor, submit a news
> tip, get subscription info, or place an ad.
> baltimoresun.com (tm) and sunspot.net ® are copyright © 2004 by The
> Baltimore Sun.
> Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
:down:
 
SWAFA30....see what I mean....that's your union "negotiating" thru the media. BTW...I tend to believe that Hardage is right when she says that ground time is taken into account. My example would be the MCI-MDW type runs...1 hour and 15 minute block to block time, yet because the mileage is 504, it constitutes two "trips". That means that there is another 45 "minutes" that you've earned...and on a 30 minute turn....that pretty much covers the ground time.
 
My example would be the MCI-MDW type runs...1 hour and 15 minute block to block time, yet because the mileage is 504, it constitutes two "trips".

Geez, KC, am I going to have to start following you around from thread to thread to correct your inaccuracies???

You obviously haven't read our Contract and learned the difference between "standard" and "non-standard" trips. Pleae read directly from our Contract:

"For the purposes of pay computation, a standard trip shall be any trip for which the nonstop mileage... is 243 miles or less. A non-standard trip shall be any trip for which the nonstop mileage exceeds 243 miles."

Further...

"Flight Attendants will be paid for non-standard trips at the rate of one standard trip as set forth in paragraph 1 above, plus one-tenth (.1) trip for each forty mile increment over 243 miles..."

So in layman's terms, we are paid 1 TFP for the first 243 miles, and after that, 1 TFP for each 400 miles (rounded to the nearest tenth). There is additional compensation built in on some flights that SWA "pads" for time... during busy air traffic times, SWA adds anywhere between 10 and 30 minutes to a flight's time to help keep us on schedule. In these cases they do add a few tenths of a trip here and there to those trips. So MCI-MDW can pay differently at different times of day.

But considering that it's not during peak traffic time, MCI-MDW does NOT pay 2 trips as you claim. It is booked for 1:15, and actually pays 1.4, NOT 2.0. Since SWA rounds up to the nearest tenth, if it were paid by hours rather than mileage, this leg would pay 1.3. So the incredible amount that you mention that we've "earned" for our ground time is a whopping 6 minutes. Even if SWA didn't round to the nearest tenth, it would be 9 minutes.

Now humor me for a moment... Think back about what made SWA famous in the early days. Does "the ten minute-turn" ring a bell? And with this formula, the the 10 minutes ARE almost credited. But our turn time now is almost 30 minutes. It's a different world now, different operating practices, but we're operating under a system that was built for the 10-minute turn.

That's why we re-negotiate our Contract every few years.

I certainly hope you'll go back to every message board where you've posted this inaccuracy and correct yourself.
 
swagalleyhag said:
Geez, KC, am I going to have to start following you around from thread to thread to correct your inaccuracies???

You obviously haven't read our Contract and learned the difference between "standard" and "non-standard" trips. Pleae read directly from our Contract:

"For the purposes of pay computation, a standard trip shall be any trip for which the nonstop mileage... is 243 miles or less. A non-standard trip shall be any trip for which the nonstop mileage exceeds 243 miles."

Further...

"Flight Attendants will be paid for non-standard trips at the rate of one standard trip as set forth in paragraph 1 above, plus one-tenth (.1) trip for each forty mile increment over 243 miles..."

So in layman's terms, we are paid 1 TFP for the first 243 miles, and after that, 1 TFP for each 400 miles (rounded to the nearest tenth). There is additional compensation built in on some flights that SWA "pads" for time... during busy air traffic times, SWA adds anywhere between 10 and 30 minutes to a flight's time to help keep us on schedule. In these cases they do add a few tenths of a trip here and there to those trips. So MCI-MDW can pay differently at different times of day.

But considering that it's not during peak traffic time, MCI-MDW does NOT pay 2 trips as you claim. It is booked for 1:15, and actually pays 1.4, NOT 2.0. Since SWA rounds up to the nearest tenth, if it were paid by hours rather than mileage, this leg would pay 1.3. So the incredible amount that you mention that we've "earned" for our ground time is a whopping 6 minutes. Even if SWA didn't round to the nearest tenth, it would be 9 minutes.

Now humor me for a moment... Think back about what made SWA famous in the early days. Does "the ten minute-turn" ring a bell? And with this formula, the the 10 minutes ARE almost credited. But our turn time now is almost 30 minutes. It's a different world now, different operating practices, but we're operating under a system that was built for the 10-minute turn.

That's why we re-negotiate our Contract every few years.

I certainly hope you'll go back to every message board where you've posted this inaccuracy and correct yourself.
I picked up my mother in law at the airport yesterday. She flew in on Northwest. I noticed that it was at the gate at 3:30. I noticed that it was scheduled to leave at 4:50. Since KC isn't a "hub" for Northwest, I'm assuming the flight crew was hanging out waiting for the return flight. How much is "padded" into the Northwest FA's pay for that hour?

I'll condsider going back to change my inaacuracy when y'all stop slipping flyers under hotel room doors. Deal??
 
I don't know Northwest's contract, nor do I know exactly how that crew was scheduled that day. You seem to like to assume without knowing all of the facts, but I'm not going to fall into that trap.

I'm giving you facts, and instead you focus on a flier slid under a hotel room door.

Your mind is made up, and you're unwilling to listen. I'm done.
 
swagalleyhag said:
I don't know Northwest's contract, nor do I know exactly how that crew was scheduled that day. You seem to like to assume without knowing all of the facts, but I'm not going to fall into that trap.

I'm giving you facts, and instead you focus on a flier slid under a hotel room door.

Your mind is made up, and you're unwilling to listen. I'm done.
Is it not a fact that your union was sliding flyers under hotel room doors? What is your goal in doing this? To "educate" the customer?

And I do listen....just ask wwtraveller. I met with him when the rampers were in negotiations...had dinner and everything. I'm not much of a union guy. He is. We actually had a nice dinner without resorting to fisticuffs.

I'm actually a rather likeable fellow. And I am perhaps a little too focused on facts. I just enjoy a good argument. It's just that I've seen very few facts presented by your union...just a lot of "misinformation" in an effort to "educate" the traveller. I do get some information from the media....and a weigh it with other "facts". Thank you for your comments on my words about the terminated employee...that was one article by one person. But I've read articles in the Dallas Morning News, the Baltimore Sun, the Las Vegas and LA papers, and I've searched websites (TWU555 is one) for what information I can find concerning this issue. The common thread in every one of those sources is ground time pay. Forgive me if I "leap to conclusions" based on those "sound bites" that seem to find their way everywhere. BTW - If you ever overnight in KC, let me know...dinners on me.

.
 
I'll have to agree with KCFlyer with a lot of innacurate information, I guess you could call it propaganda, being put forth by the flight attendant union. While I only wish the best for our flight attendants, they're awesome!, I find their union leadership's unorthodox methods and demands detrimental to them getting a good and fair contract. Nobody to my knowledge, including the pilot group, are paid for ground time or time from check in? I think their negotiations would be moving along quicker if the union leadership would concentrate on rigs and pay. I find the flyers being placed in pilot lounges with innacuracies and stretches of the truth (for example, flyer stated company has lost the love by not sending out Christmas cards anymore...they never did...and they still send out birthday & anniversary cards). Our union leadership attempted make us think the company didn't give a &#$@! about us too. 70% of us saw thru it and subsequently voted them out of office. While our flight attendants are very deserving of a fair contract, I certainly hope the actions of their union don't have a detrimental impact on the future of this truly unique company. We're our own worst enemies.
 
Spanky,

Our Union IS focusing on Rigs and pay. It's just difficult to explain rigs to non-Pilot/ non Flight Attendants. The easiest way to describe them is that they are work rules to help pay for ground time. I guess that's why people are getting so hung up on ground time pay. But believe me, all we are asking for is Rigs. The Rigs that the Company offered us would rarely, if ever, kick in.

The flier you mentioned was intended to point out how things have changed since Jim Parker became CEO. For some reason, it's easier for people to believe that 7.200+ FA's have changed into a bunch of mal-contents. Sure, each group has a few bad apples, but by and large the FA's at SWA love our jobs, are smart, funny, and hardworking. We want a Contract that rewards us as such.

Oh well.

See you on the plane some day.
 
swagalleyhag said:
The flier you mentioned was intended to point out how things have changed since Jim Parker became CEO.
Jim Parker will still be CEO after any contract is voted in. I'd suggest your union focus on your contract...not Jim Parker.
 
KCFlyer said:
Jim Parker will still be CEO after any contract is voted in. I'd suggest your union focus on your contract...not Jim Parker.
Kcflyer,
Jim Parker and the NT team are one and the same. Mr. Parker has been the head of negotiations for ALL workgroups for more than 15 years. When the lead negotiator is also the CEO and a 7K+ member, frontline employee workgroup watch's him constantly try to bypass the negotiated team that was elected by the membership...and continue in "union-busting" tactics...what would you think? The RLA has srict rules as far as negotiations go. Mr. Parker continually uses company communication avenues to try to subvert our elected NT! It will not work this time! I will repeat the TWU 556 Mantra, "MY TEAM SPEAKS FOR ME"!

I will start signing my posts as soon as all else choose to do so!
Wn F/A for 14 years!
 
I have been intrigued by the current state of negotiations at SWA between its flight attendants and the company. I have been reading through many of the postings related to this topic and feel compelled to respond.

I want to thank the SWA flight attendant who posted the link to savingoursouthwest.com. The information was informative, well articulated, and professionally written. Unlike AFA's press releases, the tone was professional, unemotional, and I felt that it did not contain negative Southwest-bashing rhetoric. I believe that the TWU union representing SWA flight attendants is appropriate in their efforts to obtain TRIP RIGS. I disagree with those who suggest, "Take the money and run." From what I can ascertain, the contract dispute is about quality-of-life issues on the job and those concerns aren't addressed by merely raising the base wage.

With all due respect to FLY, who appears to be a United flight attendant, I would like to correct some inaccuracies that were made in his/her postings with regard to our contract. No, we do not get paid for tidying the aircraft cabin, however we are only required to tidy on flights that are less than 3 hrs of block time and only on a thru flight (read one-stop). On terminating flights that do not continue on, we do not tidy. When we do tidy, we are required to fold blankets and pillows and pick up trash and newpapers left in seats. We do not clean lavs, we do not cross seatbelts, and we do not clean out seat pockets.

In spite of our concessionary contract, we were still able to retain our trip rigs. For those of you who do not understand what a TRIP RIG is, I will try to explain. At United, our trip pairings are worth a minimum number of hours. A 1-day trip is worth a minimum of 5 hrs; a 2-day, 10 hrs; a 3-day, 15 hrs; and a 4-day is worth 21 hrs. This means that if I work a 1-day trip, such as a San Francisco-Orange County turn, I will get paid for 5 flight hours of pay for a trip that is actually about 2 hours of flight time. I am working 2 flight hours, but I am getting paid for 5 hours. The 3 hours of "soft time" pay makes up the unpaid ground time, such as boarding and deplaning, tidying, and domicile check-in. A 2-day San Francisco-Chicago trip is worth about 9 hrs of actual flight time, but I get paid for 10 hrs. The SOFT TIME component indirectly compensates us for ground time that is otherwise termed as "unpaid". Reserves usually see the most soft time in their schedule by the end of the month. The flight attendant may have flown 75 "actual" flight hours, but because of our trip rigs, will be paid for 85 hours (an arbitrary number here).

I do not want to make this thread entirely about refuting what FLY had posted under another topic, but some of the comparisons between United's contract and Southwest's contract were misleading. FLY complained that we do not have 401 K matching, which is correct, however unlike many companies, United has a pension plan. Most companies that match 401 K contributions do not provide a pension for their employees. Also, profit sharing and performance bonuses are a newly negotiated part of our compensation package and are in the process of being unveiled. Furthermore, we DO get paid for holding time. If a flight has a mechanical delay at the gate and passengers are on board, we get paid holding time after the first 10 minutes of holding. Lengthy delays at the gate can add up to a nice little bonus at the end of the month.

While we may not have the highest hourly rate of pay, our work rules and other pay factors significantly add to our overall pay.
 
JAMAKE1 said:
While we may not have the highest hourly rate of pay, our work rules and other pay factors significantly add to our overall pay.
Yet your company is still in bankruptcy, no? Southwests 401K match, very generous health insurance, and profit sharing also add significantly to their overall pay. Yet these numbers are usually to be exluded in any discussions about compensation.
 
KC:

What does United's bankruptcy have to do with anything? I do not understand why you posed that question. It is irrelevent to the topic at hand, unless of course you were trying to get in a jab.

I am not a United cheerleader. I am merely pointing out that Southwest flight attendants do lack some industry standard work rules. I do think that their quality-of-life issues are valid complaints. I have had read that not having time to eat in the course of the day is one such quality-of-life issue. At United, if our duty day is scheduled for 8 hours or more and we have less than 2 hours of ground time in between flights, contractually United has to provide us with a crew meal.
This is now the time for SWA flight attendants to have those issues resolved. Jim Parker throwing money at them in the form of a base wage increase isn't going to address those concerns.
 
JAMAKE1 said:
KC:

What does United's bankruptcy have to do with anything? I do not understand why you posed that question. It is irrelevent to the topic at hand, unless of course you were trying to get in a jab.

I am not a United cheerleader. I am merely pointing out that Southwest flight attendants do lack some industry standard work rules. I do think that their quality-of-life issues are valid complaints. I have had read that not having time to eat in the course of the day is one such quality-of-life issue. At United, if our duty day is scheduled for 8 hours or more and we have less than 2 hours of ground time in between flights, contractually United has to provide us with a crew meal.
This is now the time for SWA flight attendants to have those issues resolved. Jim Parker throwing money at them in the form of a base wage increase isn't going to address those concerns.
All I am pointing out is that that "duty rig" must come at some cost. Your management is still looking for ways to cut costs. So could it be that some of those work rules are being stalked?

The other point is that all SWA unions have a superb 401K match...they have a superb profit sharing plan... they have incredibly cheap (to the employee) health insurance. Yet these "real dollar" benefits are always overlooked in the grand scheme of things. The typical line is "401k (or profit sharing or stock options) do not put food on the table". And true enough, they don't. But let me tell you....as I age, a dollar for dollar match in the 401K plan looks DAMN good. Health insurance that I would pay less than $200 a month for would be great. A "little bonus" in the form of profit sharing at the end of the year is something that a whole lot of people don't get to experience. All of that is "outside" the hourly rate. But it seems that it's all to be ignored when it comes to "keeping that LUVing feeling".
 
KC:

Fighting for change isn't always pretty. Rosa Parks taking a seat at the front of the bus wasn't pretty at the time. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom defying state law and issuing marriage licenses to gay couples isn't pretty, but it's necessary. Usually a little ugliness is necessary in taking a stand and fighting for change. In collective bargaining, it's a motivator for getting management back to the negotiating table. I respectfully disagree with you and others who say, "oh, just take the money and don't rock the boat." Southwest has become a major player and is continuing to evolve. They have gone from being a short-hop regional carrier to having become a major transcon airline. It sounds to me like some of the existing workrules (or lack thereof) no longer work in the type of operation that Southwest Airlines has evolved into. This current contract dispute might get pretty ugly. In the short term, Southwest's "love and light" image might become tarnished. The bottom line is, is that the collective (SWA F/A's) doesn't feel valued. SWA flight attendants are looking around at their other major airline counterparts and are NOTICING that their work rules and on-the-job quality-of-life isn't up to the same standard. The more mature Southwest Airlines becomes, these issues will continue to present themselves. The same will occur at Jet Blue. In five year's time a flight attendant is going to be pretty sick and tired of making the same $20 an hour.