Rather than refer to the respective unions, I would like to start a real conversation between AA, US and AWA flight attendants. Right now, it's pretty clear that none of us are being well represented.
The two union leaderships have their own interests, and they're not necessarily reflecting ours. Unfortunately, that leaves us on our own to manage the situation.
The long and the short of it is:
-AA has a contract. Signed by Ms. Glading, it is APFA's CLA. It's concessionary, the product of a "better than what we're facing now" environment. It is possible to change it, but subject to arbitration.
Here's the thing: Arbitrators are paid by corporations. They do not get re-hired it they are pro-labor. So they tend to make decisions bent toward the corporation. Bottom line, they are not who you want making decisions for your future.
(Case in point: USairways has the most abysmal rest area on flights in the industry. Brought to you by an arbitrator).
-Usair has a contract. Five years long. Yup, we just got it. We regarded it as concessionary. With the threat of losing any right to vote on anything, the third time it was submitted- read-shoved down our throats, it passed.
For most US flight attendants, the issue is not AFA. We would be happy with a union called MS. GLADING'S LOVELY BIRDS if it meant that we could negotiate the BEST of both APFA and AFA's contracts. But there is complexity here. From what I understand, to get to this, we have to ditch them both.
Hear me well. Most of us DO NOT CARE if Ms. Glading runs the union we pay dues to. You can keep your reps, all your stuff. However, there is a complex game that has to be played here, and it is in the hands of the AA flight attendants. As it stands, certain actions cause an election. AA outnumbers US. There is NO danger of AA flight attendants losing control.
The reason for an election is to extricate AA flight attendants from the concessionary CLA that ends in arbitration. That's all. Once extricated, both the CLA and the Usair contract can be pulled from to create something more favorable to all flight attendants at the new AA. Once again, AA has the numbers, so any agreement will reflect their will. No one else's. Why is it important to US flight attendants? Because if you don't take these actions, we lose everything we have ever negotiated and fall under your CLA. Your concessionary CLA.
That reality would make the new AA management ecstatic. 24,000 flight attendants in a concessionary contract for a minimum of 7 years.
To avoid this, you have to jump through the complicated hoops.
Ms. Glading can run the new union. You can keep all of your people. Just give us a chance to re-negotiate. There is an opportunity here, but the machinations of the people that are supposed to represent us are starting to get in the way.
The message that we are being given is that AA flight attendants think that they have the best that they can get, USair took too long to get a contract, their union is trying to do an end run and CWA wants your money, yada yada.
(The Usair contract took too long because AWA management recognized it for the bargain that it was and ran it out. Serious negotiations didn't happen until the threat of a strike. It is SICKENINGLY ironic that we are about to repeat history with a concessionary AA contract that the new AA management will definitely run out until forced to negotiate again. Figure about 7 years).
I find it impossible and incomprehensible that 16,000 AA flight attendants do not have the intellectual curiousity to investigate what USair flight attendants have in their contract. 60%, sure. We have them too. Just happy to accept what they're given and complain about it later. But all 16,000? Surely some of you want the best deal you can get?
AWA management negotiates HARD. They give nothing away. They expect their opponents to do their best, just as they do. There is no morality here, just business. Mr. Parker once famously said : "you get what you negotiate". Take him at his word.
A little history; Prior to 9/11, Usair had some of the best, if odd and arcane language in Flight attendant contracts in the industry. Negotiated by smart, tough, ethical Pittsburgh women who didn't trust anything but solid language, they protected US flight attendants for a long time. During the 90's US management tried to dismantle these protections, even hiring an outside firm that specialized in union busting. They succeeded at some things, but not most. Enter 9/11 and bankruptcy contracts and we STILL had some good language.
The most important of that language was the ME TOO clause. Basically, whatever pilots got, we got. And we flew as a crew. No splitting up. No you go here and I go there. It protected flight attendants because airlines tend to mess with flight attendants but not pilots. The reason this history is important is because with our new contract, we just lost that protection; i.e. pairing of pilots and flight attendants on all trips.
It potentially creates more flexibility for flight attendants, but also a huge window for abuse.
Hence, we come to the USair contract. The current US contract contains specific and hard language pertaining to scheduling. That's because the majority of flight attendants did not want to break from the pilots, knowing they would be prey for scheduling.
This is just about to hit in force in the new year, and it's already causing consternation. It's about 3am, and you're supposed to be able to go home, but scheduling is re-routing you to some God awful thing. Oh, and it's your kid's birthday. Without specific and hard language, you have nothing. You're re-routed.
As I understand it, AA's CLA has a provision for PBS. So does the US contract, but with a ton of language.
That language = MONEY. Right now, it is sitting on the table, and in serious danger of being left there, unless AA flight attendants recognize it, and want it. Again, it's complex stuff, and seems largely theoretical, but when PBS comes slamming down on your life, you're going to want it.
A few relevant details:
Health insurance: US' is better. Again, that's MONEY folks. Money that is either in your pocket or theirs.
Vacation: US' is better.
Compensation: Overall, US is better, however, I think that we could do better still. Southwest significantly exceeds us both.
Retirement: AA's is vastly better.
The choice is yours. You have the numbers. If just 4500 of you decide you want a true second shot at a contract, we get to vote. There is no way to get a real second shot at contractual gains without this. If you allow your CLA to go to arbitration, we all lose.
This does not mean that AFA "wins". The makeup of a "combined union" is also up to the membership. It doesn't have to be CWA and frankly, it doesn't have to change much from what you have. Like I said, we care less about what it is called than what is DOES. I, for one, would like a new representative body.
Many would have you believe that APFA can re-negotiate the CLA and take the best from both contracts in the short time before it goes to an arbitrator. I have cited the specific language regarding Usair's PBS, that alone would take significant time. The best you will get is a little money, and then we all have your CLA. That is not the BEST we can do.
If AA flight attendants do not act, the shame of it all is that in the estimated 18 months to full merge, they will have the luxury of time to learn all of the differences that USair had, but didn't carry over, because union leaderships were more interested in preserving their own future than that of their members. Lost opportunities are painful indeed.
Ask yourself, why is your leadership so determined to subject your future to an arbitrator? What's in it for you?
The AFA website does have good information about contractual differences. I wish that APFA would do the same, it would be useful to see a different reading. It would also be useful if one or either gave us frank, honest language about the legal issues and how this all falls together.
I think we're all here to learn. Different views are welcome. If you're not a flight attendant, kindly do not use this thread as an opportunity to grind your ax. Much appreciated.
The two union leaderships have their own interests, and they're not necessarily reflecting ours. Unfortunately, that leaves us on our own to manage the situation.
The long and the short of it is:
-AA has a contract. Signed by Ms. Glading, it is APFA's CLA. It's concessionary, the product of a "better than what we're facing now" environment. It is possible to change it, but subject to arbitration.
Here's the thing: Arbitrators are paid by corporations. They do not get re-hired it they are pro-labor. So they tend to make decisions bent toward the corporation. Bottom line, they are not who you want making decisions for your future.
(Case in point: USairways has the most abysmal rest area on flights in the industry. Brought to you by an arbitrator).
-Usair has a contract. Five years long. Yup, we just got it. We regarded it as concessionary. With the threat of losing any right to vote on anything, the third time it was submitted- read-shoved down our throats, it passed.
For most US flight attendants, the issue is not AFA. We would be happy with a union called MS. GLADING'S LOVELY BIRDS if it meant that we could negotiate the BEST of both APFA and AFA's contracts. But there is complexity here. From what I understand, to get to this, we have to ditch them both.
Hear me well. Most of us DO NOT CARE if Ms. Glading runs the union we pay dues to. You can keep your reps, all your stuff. However, there is a complex game that has to be played here, and it is in the hands of the AA flight attendants. As it stands, certain actions cause an election. AA outnumbers US. There is NO danger of AA flight attendants losing control.
The reason for an election is to extricate AA flight attendants from the concessionary CLA that ends in arbitration. That's all. Once extricated, both the CLA and the Usair contract can be pulled from to create something more favorable to all flight attendants at the new AA. Once again, AA has the numbers, so any agreement will reflect their will. No one else's. Why is it important to US flight attendants? Because if you don't take these actions, we lose everything we have ever negotiated and fall under your CLA. Your concessionary CLA.
That reality would make the new AA management ecstatic. 24,000 flight attendants in a concessionary contract for a minimum of 7 years.
To avoid this, you have to jump through the complicated hoops.
Ms. Glading can run the new union. You can keep all of your people. Just give us a chance to re-negotiate. There is an opportunity here, but the machinations of the people that are supposed to represent us are starting to get in the way.
The message that we are being given is that AA flight attendants think that they have the best that they can get, USair took too long to get a contract, their union is trying to do an end run and CWA wants your money, yada yada.
(The Usair contract took too long because AWA management recognized it for the bargain that it was and ran it out. Serious negotiations didn't happen until the threat of a strike. It is SICKENINGLY ironic that we are about to repeat history with a concessionary AA contract that the new AA management will definitely run out until forced to negotiate again. Figure about 7 years).
I find it impossible and incomprehensible that 16,000 AA flight attendants do not have the intellectual curiousity to investigate what USair flight attendants have in their contract. 60%, sure. We have them too. Just happy to accept what they're given and complain about it later. But all 16,000? Surely some of you want the best deal you can get?
AWA management negotiates HARD. They give nothing away. They expect their opponents to do their best, just as they do. There is no morality here, just business. Mr. Parker once famously said : "you get what you negotiate". Take him at his word.
A little history; Prior to 9/11, Usair had some of the best, if odd and arcane language in Flight attendant contracts in the industry. Negotiated by smart, tough, ethical Pittsburgh women who didn't trust anything but solid language, they protected US flight attendants for a long time. During the 90's US management tried to dismantle these protections, even hiring an outside firm that specialized in union busting. They succeeded at some things, but not most. Enter 9/11 and bankruptcy contracts and we STILL had some good language.
The most important of that language was the ME TOO clause. Basically, whatever pilots got, we got. And we flew as a crew. No splitting up. No you go here and I go there. It protected flight attendants because airlines tend to mess with flight attendants but not pilots. The reason this history is important is because with our new contract, we just lost that protection; i.e. pairing of pilots and flight attendants on all trips.
It potentially creates more flexibility for flight attendants, but also a huge window for abuse.
Hence, we come to the USair contract. The current US contract contains specific and hard language pertaining to scheduling. That's because the majority of flight attendants did not want to break from the pilots, knowing they would be prey for scheduling.
This is just about to hit in force in the new year, and it's already causing consternation. It's about 3am, and you're supposed to be able to go home, but scheduling is re-routing you to some God awful thing. Oh, and it's your kid's birthday. Without specific and hard language, you have nothing. You're re-routed.
As I understand it, AA's CLA has a provision for PBS. So does the US contract, but with a ton of language.
That language = MONEY. Right now, it is sitting on the table, and in serious danger of being left there, unless AA flight attendants recognize it, and want it. Again, it's complex stuff, and seems largely theoretical, but when PBS comes slamming down on your life, you're going to want it.
A few relevant details:
Health insurance: US' is better. Again, that's MONEY folks. Money that is either in your pocket or theirs.
Vacation: US' is better.
Compensation: Overall, US is better, however, I think that we could do better still. Southwest significantly exceeds us both.
Retirement: AA's is vastly better.
The choice is yours. You have the numbers. If just 4500 of you decide you want a true second shot at a contract, we get to vote. There is no way to get a real second shot at contractual gains without this. If you allow your CLA to go to arbitration, we all lose.
This does not mean that AFA "wins". The makeup of a "combined union" is also up to the membership. It doesn't have to be CWA and frankly, it doesn't have to change much from what you have. Like I said, we care less about what it is called than what is DOES. I, for one, would like a new representative body.
Many would have you believe that APFA can re-negotiate the CLA and take the best from both contracts in the short time before it goes to an arbitrator. I have cited the specific language regarding Usair's PBS, that alone would take significant time. The best you will get is a little money, and then we all have your CLA. That is not the BEST we can do.
If AA flight attendants do not act, the shame of it all is that in the estimated 18 months to full merge, they will have the luxury of time to learn all of the differences that USair had, but didn't carry over, because union leaderships were more interested in preserving their own future than that of their members. Lost opportunities are painful indeed.
Ask yourself, why is your leadership so determined to subject your future to an arbitrator? What's in it for you?
The AFA website does have good information about contractual differences. I wish that APFA would do the same, it would be useful to see a different reading. It would also be useful if one or either gave us frank, honest language about the legal issues and how this all falls together.
I think we're all here to learn. Different views are welcome. If you're not a flight attendant, kindly do not use this thread as an opportunity to grind your ax. Much appreciated.
