AFA Hires Financial Analyst

[beachboy]

AFA Requests a Financial Analyst

Dear PIT40 Members,

A few days after the announcement of our base closing the company held a Conference Call with the Union to explain the economic reasons for the base closing as required by the Transition Agreement. The language in the Transition Agreement contains a "meet and confer clause" requiring the company to provide analysis supporting their decision to close the domicile.

Such analysis would have to demonstrate that a cost savings would be achieved by closing a domicile. The first issue expressed to the company during the call was it was the Union's interpretation the intent of the language to meet and confer with the Union was to occur PRIOR to such an announcement, not after such announcement.

An announcement of this magnitude, WITHOUT PRIOR NOTIFICATION TO THE UNION, puts the Union at a disadvantage with its members and the media.

Apparently the company's interpretation of this language is to meet and confer after the announcement. Once all the Confidentiality Agreements were signed by the Union leadership the company provided the financial data justifying their decision to close the base. Once I had time to review this information I was not satisfied with the company's explanation to close the PIT domicile.

In my opinion there was no compelling information illustrating the PIT base was a financial burden to the company. Certainly there was not enough convincing information to justify disrupting the lives of 1000 employees.

In order for the Union to conduct "Due Diligence" MEC President Mike Flores and I requested the analysis be reviewed by a financial expert. Mike contacted International President, Pat Friend, who agreed this was a logical, reasonable and necessary request.

Ms. Friend authorized the expense and retained the services of aviation financial analyst Dan Akins. Dan is with Merge Global Inc. He is a transportation economist who has over 20 years experience consulting in the commercial airline industry. Recently, Mr. Akins has been a financial advisor to organized labor groups in recent U.S. airline restructurings and is a graduate of the London School of Economics where he specialized in Transport Economics.

At this time he has provided the company with a signed Confidentiality Agreement and will be allowed to review the data on which the Company concluded the PIT domicile closure would provide a financial cost savings to the Company.

It is my intent to use any resources available to us including any assistance that can be offered from the political arena. I have contacted ALPA and offered our support. Please be aware that my dialogue with the company and other statements issued by the company over the past two months concerning PIT evolved from "PIT is profitable", to, "PIT is marginally profitable", to, "we are losing money on a few flights in PIT", and finally, "we are losing 40 million a year in PIT".

These recent communications with the company over the past months confirmed that a more thorough review of the financial data was necessary.

In Unity,

Mark Gentile
LECP - Council 40

 

[EMBFA]

How about negotiating a merged contract for 12,000 F/As instead of trying to justify a domicile for a city with 22 flights for 350 people? What does the union have to do with where the company chooses to maintain domiciles?

Waste of my dues money as usual.

 

[N924PS]

How about negotiating a merged contract for 12,000 F/As instead of trying to justify a domicile for a city with 22 flights for 350 people? What does the union have to do with where the company chooses to maintain domiciles?

Waste of my dues money as usual.

Amen.

Where was AFA when other bases such as BWI, LAX, SAN, SFO were closed?

Now that PIT is no longer the center of the USAirways universe, all of a sudden AFA comes to it's rescue? Please. Spend the money getting a good contract for the other 12,000 members you represent.

It's done, move on.

 

[ClueByFour]

How about negotiating a merged contract for 12,000 F/As instead of trying to justify a domicile for a city with 22 flights for 350 people? What does the union have to do with where the company chooses to maintain domiciles?

Uhh, reading comprehension?

The language in the Transition Agreement contains a "meet and confer clause" requiring the company to provide analysis supporting their decision to close the domicile.

Such analysis would have to demonstrate that a cost savings would be achieved by closing a domicile.

Apparently it's part of that pesky contractual language between the AFA and the company. If they don't do it, all 350 of those people have a DFR lawsuit that's wrapped up with a stylish blue bow (just like those snazzy new uniforms!).

Waste of my dues money as usual.

Which pales in comparison to the potential loss to AFA (and your dues money) if they don't do it and one or more of the current PIT F/As files a DFR lawsuit.

Drop the "I was beat up by a Pittsburgh F/A" grudge for a few seconds and think logically about it.

 

[donttouchthebeauty]

Oh Goodness, People move on!!! Things change... Just like some F/As skirt size... You start out at a 0 and over time you end up as a 16... It hurts but you get used to it... Most importantly the company can close any base at any time.. So the best thing to do is face the facts and realoze that PIT will never be what it once was.. It is sad but oh so true.. Put in for your new base and embrace it or retire..

 

[bigbusboy]

AFA Requests a Financial Analyst



Such analysis would have to demonstrate that a cost savings would be achieved by closing a domicile. The first issue expressed to the company during the call was it was the Union's interpretation the intent of the language to meet and confer with the Union was to occur PRIOR to such an announcement, not after such announcement.

Where is the contract language that states this information MUST be provided to the union PRIOR to any announcement? This is merely an assumption or subjective interpretation of the contract on AFA's part and they are reaching way too far with it. They need to be focusing their $$$ on contract negotiations instead of trying to delay or halt the inevitable.

 

[Travelpro72]

While we may all have our personal opinions about the old PIT hub and the closing of PIT as a base I will have to say that it's OVER. NOW is the time that the union should be spending OUR money on getting the contract done. Even if the cost analysis comes back different than the companies they can't make them "bring the base back". It's done. I'm po'd about it and don't think it should have reached these lows but the fact remains that IT HAS. The company has no legal obligation to keep a base or hub where they don't want to as far as I know. I say get to the negotiating table and hammer a contract out with a "stand for NOTHING less" approach and take no $H!T while doing it. ENOUGH ALREADY.

 

[BajaBabe]

There are certain inherent problems that are associated with being a CEO. it is a job that everyone thinks they could do better and you are constantly left with making bitter decision on the outcome of you're company. I believe that the USAirways MEC has far exceeded their relm of envelopment as to the direction of USAirways. Since when does the MEC decide what planes fly where, what bases remain open and what uniforms we will wear? if the union truly was focused on bringing a contract to it's members they would not have the time to posture themselves and raise the expectations of the PIT flight attendants. The loss of Pittsburgh is great and many employees who work at the airport will have no ability to transfer or continue employment at usairways. If the company was going to afford special considerations to the PIT flight attendents, one can only wonder how they are viewing this latest escapade.

We need to remember that this will not be the only base to close. Mr. parker came on the property after we as employees gutted our contract. If you are disenchanted with 1983 wages then that should be the top priority of our mec. They have raised our dues and given very little in return. I ask each and every one of you call you lec office and demand the union work for the majority of employees that every day experience a hostile environment, reduced vacation, higher insurance and a reserve system that deplorable.

At the end of the day we all work for USAirways not AFA

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

Spend money on negotiating our contract.

Contact your LEC and let them know where you want progress done.

 

[bigbusboy]

if the union truly was focused on bringing a contract to it's members they would not have the time to posture themselves and raise the expectations of the PIT flight attendants.

And this is what chaps my pahunkus the most. AFA is actually doing a disservice to the PIT membership and filling them with a false sense of hope. Spend union time and money on areas that will make a real difference to the situation: support for job retraining and interviewing for those who chose to leave. Rally together F/As in other bases to offer assistance to PIT F/As as they transition to new bases. These are the two examples that come to mind first, I'm sure there are more.

 

[SKY HIGH]

I say get to the negotiating table and hammer a contract out with a "stand for NOTHING less" approach and take no $H!T while doing it. ENOUGH ALREADY.

sky high states: I would expect nothing less from my UNION who also "represent" those 350 in Pittsburgh. Arent we supposed to stand behind everyone, who wears the wings in uniform? Everyone's support is fragmented. I ONLY care about Reserve issues. I ONLY care about Retiring. I wish we had block sharing....etc...etc. Even worse, I DONT CARE about.....(place any F/A issue here)....because it doesnt affect me personally.

They deserve to let the process play out, if only, because it's their right, it's in the transition agreement.


only stating opinions

 

[bigbusboy]

They deserve to let the process play out, if only, because it's their right, it's in the transition agreement.
only stating opinions

I couldn't agree with you more. However, AFA is taking a very "streched" interpretation of the transition agreement. In so doing, they are doing a disservice to the PIT membership.

 

[Zarah]

What I do not understand is what exactly the union hopes to gain.

Let's just say the results come back that PIT was not losing as much money as stated. Then what?

 

[SKY HIGH]

What I do not understand is what exactly the union hopes to gain.

Let's just say the results come back that PIT was not losing as much money as stated. Then what?

sky high states: Isnt that holding management, ie Doug Parker accountable for his statements and ACTIONS.

(Wasnt a former CEO of AA required to step down after an accountibility issue????)

Only stating opinions

 

[missthe727]

What I do not understand is what exactly the union hopes to gain.

Let's just say the results come back that PIT was not losing as much money as stated. Then what?

I heard the point that AFA is trying to make is that PIT is making more money than PHX so if they're using that as an excuse to close PIT then what about PHX...just what I heard.
Me personally, keep PIT open...I hope it works. My seniority is already in the toilet in PHL w/ them taking out the 757 time....Who knows once a few hundred come over from PIT, if i will even be able to be based here w/ 10 years. With 300 or so F/As that will start commuting from there who are senior to a lot of us, I saw way to go AFA, spend the $$$ and keep PIT open.