AA overreached

[bluebird]

“Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment.”
– Michael Corleone

We don’t hate them. They train us not to call a home a homo (Lev 18:22, 20:13, 1 Ki 14:24, Ro 1:24, 26, 27).

Fact is, we live under their decisions (Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10, Ex 23:2).

Some here have discussed transcon turns as if that’s a bad thing. For those us who will have to pick up now to pay two mortgages because the Jimma Jams of the world have decided that we need to work the same amount of hours that they do

(they value fraternity/equality; we value liberty)--we will need those types of trips.

Commuters fly in, load up their schedules back to back in a month to meet the 420 rule, and then fly home.

The stage one thinking types like Jimma Jam failed to realize that when the “wanted those trips”, they wouldn't get them.

My trip trader will now have to compete against Jimma Jam’s trip trader to get trips that Crew Schedule releases at 1600. Jimma Jam used to be able to count on picking up my trip to pay his rent. But, because his values are perverted, I am no longer able to give him the trip.

Remember, if a liberal’s touched it—it stinks.

Aft of the cockpit door, we have a lot of Jimma Jams.

“While I think rational thought should be the order of the day…”

What is rational about an AA FA putting in 20+ years being offered no travel and no benefits when a TWA FA who has put in 15 years is being offered full passes and full benefits with AA?

It is very possible that a job action that lasted even a few days could turn a C11 into a C7...

"That's a shame." ~ Seinfeld

 

[Ifly2]

Bluebird,


Seriously, sarcasm off, just a question.

If an employee, F/A or otherwise, doesn't want to work, why not retire/quit?

Especially an F/A who would have to commute in, have two rent/mortgage payments, etc., in order to keep a job they don't want?

Just wonderin'

 

[enough already]

1966? Do you have anything more recent? In 1776 a group of people rose up against the King and won, should we activate the Minutemen Bob?

The NMB will not release the APA until well after exiting BK, there will most likely be a merger, and then a new round of negotiations will start. Release? Maybe in three years, if you are lucky. The APA will be beaten down by then.

I'm just glad we didn't have many people like you ther back then...

 

[NYer]

Most of us know what happened. Yes, abrogation of the APA agreement will most likely happen. But who's to say if there will or will not be further negotiations as the judge will make his final decision in early September.

The main thing is to remember the judge didn't just rubber stamp the request. He found two provisions that HAD to be modified.

Although the victory is sweet but short, it shows the judge found overreaching items nonetheless.

Read the decision, he found two items that had been addressed in the APA Tentative Agreement. Those items the Judge pointed out was only there because the APA vote down their TA. He found no other issues with anything else in the case,

 

[bluebird]

Bluebird,


Seriously, sarcasm off, just a question.

If an employee, F/A or otherwise, doesn't want to work, why not retire/quit?

Especially an F/A who would have to commute in, have two rent/mortgage payments, etc., in order to keep a job they don't want?

Just wonderin'

That is an option but it must make sense for the Pilot or FA’s needs or situation.

 

[AA89]

I called the Q & A line and the FA Rep there told me that the APFA union membership has said that they no longer want FAs in the system that drop trips. He said, “We want those trips.”

How can you get those trips when you do not offer a fair Early Out (e.g. w/passes) for those of us with 20+ who would love to leave? While the 50+ age requirement remains for anything reasonable, it is not worth it or us to leave.

With your new ‘minimum hours paid to maintain employment’ we no longer have the option to drop. Having to relocate (two mortgages or two rent payments means) we have to pick up not drop. Too bad first stage thinkers don’t think things through.

Corporations exist to make money. They are amoral.

You don’t think unions are greedy?

Leftsits come to: steal, kill and destroy (Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10).

When you look around and see: theft, murder, and destruction--you know a Leftist has been there.

I'm not familiar with flight attendant work rules nor do I usually use biblical references and emoticon overkill when making a point so bear with me.
So expecting you to show up and work when you are scheduled is asking too much? If, as you say, " Corporations exist to make money. They are amoral" Why would you expect anything else? Your quality of life and and being content with your job don't effect the bottom line according to management.
It is possible to treat employees with dignity and fairness and still make a profit. Thank you for agreeing with me on this.
Both corporations AND unions are greedy. At least the upper tiers are. Are they all "Leftists"?

 

[bluebird]

“So expecting you to show up and work when you are scheduled is asking too much?”

We are able to pick up or drop our trips.

“If, as you say, " Corporations exist to make money. They are amoral" Why would you expect anything else?”

Flight attendants need flexibility at various times in their lives. Many stay for some thirty years. There will be times in life (e.g. without children) when you fly high time. There will be other times (e.g. with children or caring for elderly family member, etc.) when you drop trips to be at home more.

“Your quality of life and being content with your job don't effect the bottom line according to management.”

If you care only about the bottom line, sure.

“It is possible to treat employees with dignity and fairness and still make a profit.”

Yes. Should the new rules go through as they propose, I would not recommend the job for any young person considering it.

 

[AirLUVer]

The question is should an employee whatever the situation may be, get full time benefits for part time work. Unfortunately other companies no longer offer full time benefits to part time workers. AA is still one of the few companies that offers a part time benefits package. I have a second job, and the only thing I get is a small company match for my 401k contributions, when the office is closed for holidays I get a day off but absolutely no pay. Things have changed, change is not always for the better, and it is much too early to say if this change will be for the better.

However,
If you really want to go back to the way things were, there would be no male FA's, no married FA's, no FA's over 30, and the second you got pregnant you would terminated.

 

[amt66]

The question is should an employee whatever the situation may be, get full time benefits for part time work. Unfortunately other companies no longer offer full time benefits to part time workers. AA is still one of the few companies that offers a part time benefits package. I have a second job, and the only thing I get is a small company match for my 401k contributions, when the office is closed for holidays I get a day off but absolutely no pay. Things have changed, change is not always for the better, and it is much too early to say if this change will be for the better.

However,
If you really want to go back to the way things were, there would be no male FA's, no married FA's, no FA's over 30, and the second you got pregnant you would terminated.

Well said!

 

[AA89]

We are able to pick up or drop our trips.

Flight attendants need flexibility at various times in their lives. Many stay for some thirty years. There will be times in life (e.g. without children) when you fly high time. There will be other times (e.g. with children or caring for elderly family member, etc.) when you drop trips to be at home more.

If you care only about the bottom line, sure.

Yes. Should the new rules go through as they propose, I would not recommend the job for any young person considering it.

I'm lost on your point in all of this. Good luck with your new contract.

 

[Bob Owens]

YOU, of all people should know that because of the '66 MTA Strike, the Taylor Law was born that made such actions illegal since '67. Local 100 violated the law, Toussaint was arrested, the Local was fined $2,500,000 (which the rest of us are paying for) and they lost "check off's" which had about half their Membership not paying dues...

As bad as you claim the Taylor Law is the fact is what we have is worse. No one under the Taylor Law has gone 4 years withour a raise, lost their pensions, seen their Medical go up as much as we have or ever taken a 25% paycut. When the TWU went on Strike in 1966 it was illegal, why do you think Quill went to Jail. If we were under the Taylor Law we would have had an arbitrated settlement in 2008 and they could not touch our Pensions.

As far as Check-off Unions have survived in the past without it, and there was no Union Security Clause in their contract. We had hundreds of members on hand pay after the 2003 Concessions. The reason why many were not paying after the 2005 Strike was because they felt Toussaint had folded, from what I hear nearly everyone is back on Check-off now.

The point is a Union isnt sopposed to be a Social Club wher guys with big egos put on false pretenses of who they are and belt out timely slogans, Unions are supposed to be there as a platform where the workers gain leverage to level the playing field with their employers to obtain fair compensation for what they provide, and they often have to fight to get there.

 

[Bob Owens]

From what I am hearing from pilots is they fully expect their TA to be abrogated and a strike isn't even on the radar. They believe that they will still be able to bargain for more dollars and better work rules. Doubtful considering the Creditors have stated they will not support any further sweetening of the labor deals or increased equity shares. So looks like a Mexican stand off.

And what would you expect the creditors to say? "Hold out for more guys?" First off this creditors committee has a lot more to gain by AA staying in business than dissolving. Even on the Union side, if AA dissolved both the APA and APFA wuld nomlonger exist and the TWU would lose half their ATD. What would Boeing get out of the deal, they get to not make and sell 250 plus planes to AA? The banks, what would they get? The ability to reposess all those MD-80s? Screwing over the workers is just an added bonus as it means even more money for them so it should come as no suprise that the Creditors Committee supports anything that screws the workers.

Like I said I beleive the pilots have a much better understanding of whats going on in this industry. With continued consolidation any cesation of operations by one of the Big Three whith load factors at current levels would be a transportation emergency. That means that unresolved labor disputes before the NMB will go to PEBs, just like the rails. The question is do the pilots at AA want to set the new standard or do they want to land before a PEB where the rates at Delta and United are the starting poin? Unlike BK court a PEB has already established that workers are not to be held resposible for the financial difficulties of the Carrier, this was establihed in the early days of the RLA and reinforced with the AMmtrack PEB. Sure they may have to work under an abrogated deal, so they work under imposed terms for what, 10 months tops? Unlike our union where Dues checkoff is the top priority according to statements made by the guy from Miami who calls himself NYer, the APA contract does not require dues as a condition of employment, so more than likely their isnt as much concern as far as people paying their dues. In the last 10 years how many airlines have exited BK without a contract with their pilots?

Pilots dont have to strike, they too have pens. A lot of MELs are at crew discretion whether they take the plane or not, and if they want it fixed I dont see the 75% of Line mechanics who will have concessions imposed on them that put them at the bottom of the industry for at least 6 more years, jumping through hoops to get them fixed. Sure right now, with high load factors and fare increases sticking customer satisfaction doesnt matter as much but it could lead to competitors increasing capacity in the most lucrative markets and taking away AA's most profitable clients. Sure this would hurt AA, but increased capacity at competitors would increase demand for workers and alternate opportunites as well. .

 

[Bob Owens]

Yes and they lost leverage as a result of the illegal job action. Exactly my point.

Really? They took a 25% paycut, got back 9.5% after the first year then 1.5% yearly till 2008. So if they lost leverage how come they still ended up near the top while we ended up dead last?

 

[Bob Owens]

Put down the two dollar scotch Bob.

Dont touch the stuff. Maybe you should stop smoking those cigars, the buzz is clouding your judgement.

 

[eolesen]

As bad as you claim the Taylor Law is the fact is what we have is worse. No one under the Taylor Law has gone 4 years withour a raise, lost their pensions, seen their Medical go up as much as we have or ever taken a 25% paycut. When the TWU went on Strike in 1966 it was illegal, why do you think Quill went to Jail. If we were under the Taylor Law we would have had an arbitrated settlement in 2008 and they could not touch our Pensions.

Not yet, but it's really just a matter of time, Bob. It wouldn't surprise me if in the next ten years, we see a state collapse under the pressure of pensions because its politicians were too weak to address the problem. That's why as bad as some wanted to make it out, the changes made in Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana may be what helps keep those states from going in the direction that California, Illinois and New York are heading: the latter three are strong Democratic strongholds, but also have the largest projected budget shortfalls.


Public sector pensions have already bankrupted a couple of cities and counties.

Pension funding in Illinois is actually causing cuts in education and Medicare. And they're only 43% funded right now...

http://www.pewstates...ime-85899411937

75% of the pensions in Illinois are for retired teachers and university staff, so it's a bit ironic that the people hardest hit by the cuts (teachers) are the ones who are taxing the system the most... and Pharaoh still wants to come up with more money to stop teacher layoffs?... It's just like GM, only with taxpayer dollars instead of profits.