AFA Labor Discussion (Work Conditions) 7-7 -

Status
Not open for further replies.
V

VAflyGal

Guest
Good morning. I hope I'm not violating a rule of the board and that this isn't considered a labor thread, which I'm aware can only be started by a Moderator. That said, it is my hope to keep this as a separate topic, open for serious and RESPECTFUL conversation, not as a means for a name calling, dismissive debate.

First of all I would like to say I have worked for several airlines and US Airways is the only one I have worked for that copairs with the pilots the entire pairing, minus the occasional person who splits off a trip for legality, days off, training, etc. For the most part, I have found that copairing has been most helpful for many reasons, mainly, during the pairing, we come to know one another a little better professionally, and, if it's a good day, pleasantries are exchanged and maybe a new friend is made. Part of me believes that CRM is much better being copaired, but I don't take the position that not being copaired creates a safety issue, as every other airline that doesn't copair, to my knowledge, has about the same safety record. We are all trained to do our duties, and, God forbid, if an emergency ever presented itself to any of us, I believe we would immediately take the measures we were trained to do.

I, myself, am very familiar with many things in my contract, and, if I don't know an answer to something, I am proactive enough to look it up in the contract, and, if I can't find the answer or if I need clarification, I know the phone numbers of AFA reps. Let's just be honest - if we were all one super-huge, contract waving membership, we would make our best efforts to never ever break the contract for any reason, and I believe for the most part, we are diligent in our efforts to ensure we are honoring its purpose. However, as we all know, there are times where we are willing to bend a little for our own convenience. For example, East language states that we are to be available to receive passengers 30 minutes prior to departure on aircraft with X number of seats (737, E-190, A319, A320) and 35 minutes prior to departure on aircraft with Y number of seats (757, 767) - 99% of the time, we flight attendants guard that number as sacred, for during the work day our "down time" is precious to us as so often we barely have time to reapply lipstick, much less grab a bite to eat; not to mention that we don't get paid one red cent for boarding and we all know it is the most challenging time on the aircraft in our day to day activity.

That said, who doesn't want to board a few minutes early when it's the last leg of the trip, because it benefits us to get home early if possible? I think most of us do, but, the truth is, and the LECP in PHL has put it out in e-lines before, doing that, indeed, is a violation of our contract.

Something that drives me crazy, personally, is, when we have a short overnight that may or may not be down to minimum rest, the transportation to the hotel is late. East contact language provides for taxicab expense reimbursement if the prearranged transportation is not available within 20 minutes after requested by a flight attendant. 10 minutes for an overnight that has less 10:30 RON or less. How many times have we stood on the curb, exhausted from the day, only to wait and wait for the van that's "on the way"? - Recently I was working a pairing where we waited for close to 30 minutes for transportation and our RON was just at 9:15 (barely legal) - The captain refused to take a cab, and, without giving you rambling details, as a crewmember who wanted to maintain good working conditions and to not tick off someone I would have to fly with for the next three days, I did not hail a taxi for myself, despite the agreement by both the company and AFA that I had that right.

One issue I take regarding copairing with the pilots regards the scheduling and staffing issues regarding multiple day layovers in hub cities by flight attendants from other bases. For those of you unfamiliar with the issue, PHL operates the 757-767 as what's considered an international base for that metal. International flying means international pay which means more dollars being spent on crew pay. If, however, a 757 or 767 is being operated with a PHL crew domestically, because of the international language, we receive international pay for operating that segment. CLT, however, operates the 757-767 as domestic metal, and therefore, when a 757 or 767 is flying around the US, most likely, you will have a CLT crew operating the flight with domestic rates in play. Because the 757 and 767 go in and out of PHL all the time and operate domestic flights, the company has multiple pairings with one, two, and three overnight layovers operated by CLT crews. Apparently it is more cost effective to spend tens of thousands of dollars on hotel rooms, per diem, crew transportation, etc, than it is to have a PHL crew operate the flights that would eliminate that expense. Further, if PHL operated those flights, I believe we would have a reduction in the life-changing displacements which are taking effect as I type this.

When I inquired about this, I was told that to change it, PHL would have to be reopened as a domestic 757-767 base, therefore pilots would have the opportunity to bid the equipment, then they would have to be trained, and all that came a cost to the company. Apparently this cost would be more than what it would save despite the tens of thousands of dollars on crew accommodations and uprooting the lives of the flight attendants who make the least amount of money, who have been furloughed and displaced multiple times already, and, who, in my opinion, are treated the worst because they are the most junior reserves, and have been since they got hired. This flying issue is a result of our copairing with the pilots.

So I try to take the emotion out of the equation and I ask myself to make a mental list of pros and cons of not being copaired. I am not a person who is terribly resistant to change and have been open to the idea, in large part because I didn't have a bad experience at another airline where we weren't copaired.

I realize that the flight attendants at Piedmont who weren't copaired were used and abused, and I understand why that group is very resistant to the idea.

I want to believe that rock solid language that is written in black-and-white terms will provide protections to flight attendants that are "no less favorable" than those afforded to our pilots. I also know that, even with the "me too" clause, the bottom line is there are legal ways the company has been able to get around the language that was designed to protect the flight attendants and provide them the professionalism afforded to the pilots. For example, the crew bunks on the Tel Aviv flight. Pilots have them, flight attendants don't. Even after arbitration, the flight attendants lost that fight, despite the "me too" clause that is supposed to allow for equal treatment of both groups.

I could go on, but I hope you get my point. I have flown it both ways. I have seen it both ways. I have heard flight attendants from the West who don't mind not being copaired (albeit many have never flown with the same pilots for an entire pairing, ever). I have heard from flight attendants from the West who can't stand it.

I, personally, don't want to fly PHL-PHX-PDX-PHX-LAX while the pilots fly PHL-PHX or PHL-PHX-PDX. I realize some like long days with lots of hard time, and, while I don't object to that, I also do not want to be forced into it when the two up front are enjoying a frosty beverage at the hotel while I'm on my 4th flight of the day.

What happens if we split and there is a difference of opinion regarding the contract or a decision to be made about calling a cab because the van is late or taking the flight out because we are just about to go illegal. Is it up to the lead what we do? Is it up to the most senior person? Is it up to the person who knows his or her contract better? Will it be up to scheduling and a supervisor who is demanding, "Are you refusing to fly?!"

It is my understanding that the current proposal includes language that has us split from our pilots with the ability to copair in the future. Will the company, "in the future," regard this clause as a cost prohibitive measure and cast it away with the support of an arbitrator who has no idea what it's like on the line?

How much of what we are being told is lip service versus the truth?

Bottom line. I want to see the contract, IN ITS ENTIRETY, before I vote on it. I don't want bullet points. I want the WHOLE THING. After all, it's what's NOT BEING SAID that is saying the most to me now. No one will put the gray areas onto a power point. We have to be a professional, educated, united group regarding this upcoming contract. After all, it's probably going to be the one with us for much of our career. What could be more important?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people

ebwgs

Veteran
Contributor
Aug 23, 2004
584
185
Any compromise of the ME-TOO amounts to a concession. We have given enough. As flight attendants we have no duty rigs. The pilots do. Save the MTC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

Zarah

Veteran
Oct 22, 2004
804
27
NJ
Visit site
"It is my understanding that the current proposal includes language that has us split from our pilots with the ability to copair in the future. Will the company, "in the future," regard this clause as a cost prohibitive measure and cast it away with the support of an arbitrator who has no idea what it's like on the line?"

This is exactly what I think will happen. The "cost prohibitive" terminology worked very well for them when they did not want the FA group to have the crew rest pod on the TLV flights.

When the union can show me the entire contract and I can see what they have been up to then I will be able to make a choice to vote for or against the contract. As it stands, I have no strong attachment to the pilots. However, I do seriously doubt the union has the skills to negotiate a rock solid contract that gives me protections equal to or better then we have co-paired. I also think the FA group would be delusional to think they have the ability to split from the pilots and then have the company go back to co-pairing. Reserves will take the brunt of the abuse of being rescheduled when things fall apart, creating value that the company will not want to give up once they enjoy the flexibility it creates system wide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

ebwgs

Veteran
Contributor
Aug 23, 2004
584
185
The best way to not open this can of worms is to not to agree to split under any circumstance. "Future" co-pairing? What on God's green earth is that? I don't think so. Aren't we still awaiting "preferential bidding" that was promised under a prior contract? Isn't this bunch negotiating our contract the same folks who gave away our profit sharing to the west as a "good will gesture" while we got nothing in return? 70% sick pay, 1/2 pay for dead heads and no vacation whatever. And now we're trusting them to negotiate away the MTC based on the good word of the company? "Future co-pairing?" Come on give me a break! Maintaining the MTC is not about being fond of the guys up front it's about maintaining duty rigs that we otherwise would not have. Why, after 2 BK contracts, would our union be willing to grab their ankles and yet again negotiate another concession to the company? And worse yet, it seems as though there are flight attendants willing to let it happen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

etops1

Veteran
Dec 6, 2003
2,740
362
The best way to not open this can of worms is to not to agree to split under any circumstance. "Future" co-pairing? What ib God's green earth is that? I don't think so. Aren't we still awaiting "preferential bidding" that was promised under a prior contract? Isn't this bunch negotiating our contract the same folks who gave away our profit sharing to the west as a "good will gesture" while we got nothing in return? 70% sick pay, 1/2 pay for dead heads and no vacation whatever. And now were trusting them to negotiate away the MTC based on the good word of the company? "Future co-pairing?" Come on give me a break! Maintaining the MTC is not about being fond of the guys up front it's about maintaining duty rigs that we otherwise would not have. Why, after 2 BK contracts, would our union be willing to grab their ankles and yet again negotiate another concession to the company? And worse yet, it seems as though there are flight attendants willing to let it happen!
Sorry ebwgs , I love you brother but Co-pairing needs to go. There would not have been displacements to CLT if we did not have to co-pair with the pilots. We can keep the MTC but co-pairing is hurting us. It limits our flexibility.We are the only airline that does it and it has gotten us no where . If we did not have to Co-pair with the pilots then it wouldn't matter if the time shifted to CLT from PHL. we could have still be based in PHL and fly with CLT pilots. I am finding myself having to prob transfer to CLT to follow the time . Only 39 sec lines for PHL next month .That is absurd .And its only because we co-pair. That is Pilot time not FA time .
 

HP2USFA

Advanced
Oct 8, 2008
217
21
El Mirage, Arizona
MTC is fine as long as we're not having to wait for the pilots to get our contract. I'm sorry but XXX MORE years under this tired broken contract is not worth resisting change.

WE can negotiate better duty days for ourselves. All the MTC is is negotiated language... it's not some magic wand giving us FAA pilot protections.

There's nothing stopping us from negotiating duty rigs or better duty limitations now and placing something in the contract allowing us to pair with either side based on base location until their contract is finished.

But sticking with the boys (or girls) is no reason to delay an improvement in the lives of everyone.
 

Al Legheny

Advanced
Jul 21, 2009
223
148
Sorry ebwgs , I love you brother but Co-pairing needs to go. There would not have been displacements to CLT if we did not have to co-pair with the pilots. We can keep the MTC but co-pairing is hurting us. It limits our flexibility.We are the only airline that does it and it has gotten us no where . If we did not have to Co-pair with the pilots then it wouldn't matter if the time shifted to CLT from PHL. we could have still be based in PHL and fly with CLT pilots. I am finding myself having to prob transfer to CLT to follow the time . Only 39 sec lines for PHL next month .That is absurd .And its only because we co-pair. That is Pilot time not FA time .

I have an old email in print form from an AFA member active in this area. I would caution all who read this board that the "me too" clause is only one element of scheduling and how it is done at US Airways. This affects both the pilot and flight attendant group.

USAPA, formerly ALPA builds the blocks. The USAPA block building committee builds the monthly schedule with the trip parings that the company makes. The company is looking for the most effiecient trips possible. The union is looking out for the members interests.

What does the me too clause touch on? Here is a list of the folllwing areas:
1. 401K contributions
2. Alcohol / Drug testing - paid as per pilots contract
3. Charter Pass Privileges - no less favorable than other crew members - pilots
4. Crew Meals - Oceanaic - same as pilots
5. Duty Time - same as pilots
6. Flight time limiations and Rest - Same as pilots and soon to change for the better as per new FAA regs.
7. Hours of service - same as pilots.
8. Scheduled flight time same as pilots.
9. Flight Attendant Domiciles - same as pilots
10. International Preimum pay protection - same as pilots.
11. Meal allowance
12. Pairings and lines


The author of this email string is very knowledgable about the "me too" clause and its benefits. I would also caution those on this board that it is not just the "me too" clause. The next item that immediately follows is Preferential bidding.
This is a system where each flight crew member uses a vendor supplied computer program to build his or her line. The crew member inputs the desired paramaters and the program makes the schedule. The number one person gets what they want and so on and son on.

It is great if you are senior, it is terrible if you are junior. PBS will put stuff in your line that you didn't bid. It only looks at legality not commutability. Since the current contract PIT, BOS, and LGA have all closed. That's a huge number of people who not commute who don't really want to. They may very well have lived in the local area but now they are forced to commute.

We are all older and the money is not the most important thing. SCHEDULING IS LIFE... If you have it, you have a life, if you don't you are screwed.

In my humble opinion there has not been near enough debate and discussion about scheduling issues at AFA or USAPA.
All flight crew members need to be educated to see what they will get and what they will give up before making a decision.

I will try to have this AFA member post the entire letter concerning her take on the "me too" clause. It is most informative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people

Onestep2flt

Senior
Sep 27, 2007
386
155
Bottom line. I want to see the contract, IN ITS ENTIRETY, before I vote on it. I don't want bullet points. I want the WHOLE THING. After all, it's what's NOT BEING SAID that is saying the most to me now. No one will put the gray areas onto a power point. We have to be a professional, educated, united group regarding this upcoming contract. After all, it's probably going to be the one with us for much of our career. What could be more important?

From everything that you just said, these written above are the most important! You need a copy of the entire tentative agreement and you need the time to read it and understand it before you cast a vote. The problem I think was brought up before though. It is my understanding that the person negotiating your contract now had the amount of time you had to vote on an agreement shortened considerably. Also, that the reason that she was recalled was giving misleading info about a tentative agreement that was voted on in the past. If this is true it is imperative that you have full disclosure on the whole agreement. If I were in your shoes I would start looking up answers to questions like the allotted time that you will have to vote on any agreement. I would also be asking many questions about the people who are negotiating your new contract. From what has been talked about here if true would lead me to start asking more about if the whole flight attendant group is being fairly represented or not. Until that is established anything else does not matter to a hill of beans!

I can't give any opinion on the other things you said because it does not affect me so I really don't know. From what friends tell me they all seem to believe that it is best to stay with the pilots, but that is only opinions of friends that I have so what do I know? I can see the passion a lot of you have on many issues including this one. I think it is good to see. However, I hope you are not being blinded by the fact that as it stands it does not matter much what you think if your ideas are not being listened to. For example, If you are a reserve you may have been taken by surprise by the last e-line your reserve chair put out. My friends were shocked that it made it into an e-line. They seem to think if you read between the lines that she was telling you that the voice for reserve issues was all but being ignored by the the negotiating team. Again, is every flight attendant being represented fairly? I think you must fix problems with this before you can move any further. Once a tentative agreement is reached it will be to late to fix.

I wish you guys well in this endeavor. It appears that there is more interest than in the past. I hope this is correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

Al Legheny

Advanced
Jul 21, 2009
223
148
BRAVO. Excellent post.


Here is the complete letter, posted with the author's permission.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "Me Too Clause" governs seventeen areas of our
> contract. These are some of the most important
> items of value left in our contract. The company
> would do ANYTHING to get this out of our contract.
> Listed below is the complete list.
>
> 1. 401K CONTRIBUTIONS - Contract page 22-18
> The 401K contribution will be extended to the
> Flight Attendant group as extended to other employee
> groups.
>
> 2. ALCOHOL TESTING - pg. 3-6
> Flight Attendants get paid for alcohol testing
> because it was extended to other flight crew members
> (Pilots).
>
> 3. CHARTER PASS PRIVILEGES - pg. 15-2
> Flight attendant system charter pass privileges
> shall be no less favorable than those afforded
> to other crew members
> (Pilots).
>
> 4. CREW MEALS (TRANSOCEANIC) - pg. 4-3
> Meals will be the same as those provided the
> flight deck crew (Pilots) working applicable
> transoceanic flights.
>
> 5. DRUG TESTING - pg. 3-6
> Flight Attendants will get paid for drug
> testing,because it was extended to other flight crew
> members (Pilots).
>
> 6. *DUTY TIME* - pg. 10-3
> All pairing hour credit, daily duty credit,
> variable minimum (VM) credit, reporting credit, and
> deadheading will match
> flight deck crew (Pilots).
>
> 7. *FLIGHT TIME LIMITATIONS (REST REQUIREMENTS)* -
> pg. 10-6
> Flight Attendants will be subjected to flight
> time limitations of the applicable Federal Aviation
> Regulations governing
> Pilots.
>
> 8. *HOURS OF SERVICE* - pg. 10-12
> Should there be any changes made in other
> flight crew members (Pilots) hours of service, duty
> time or pairing times,
> such changes will apply to flights attendants
> also.
>
> 9. *SCHEDULED FLIGHT TIME* - pg. 10-12
> Should there be any changes made in other
> flight crew members (Pilots) hours of service, duty
> time, or pairing times,
> such changes will apply to Flight Attendants.
>
> 10. *FLIGHT ATTENDANT DOMICILES* - pg. 2-1
> Will mean station which is the COMMON domicile
> of a group of Pilots and a group of Flight
> Attendants from which
> scheduled, extra section and miscellaneous
> flying is accomplished.
>
> 11. INTERNATIONAL PREMIUM PAY PROTECTION - pg. 12-7
> When an international premium(s) is paid to
> another flight crew member (Pilots} for a non
> transoceanic flight or any
> domestic trip originally scheduled in an
> international line, the applicable international
> premium will also be extended
> to a Flight Attendant at applicable rate(s) .
>
> 12. MEAL ALLOWANCE - pg. 4-1
> Flight Attendants on duty shall be paid expense
> for meals for each trip hour, prorated to nearest
> minute. In the event
> the Company increases the meal allowance for
> other flight crew members (Pilots) before the
> expiration of this
> agreement, those increases will be extended to
> include the Flight Attendants.
>
> 13. *MEDICAL / DENTAL BENEFITS* - pg. L5
> Agreed that if more favorable Medical/Dental
> Plan terms, policies or arrangements are instituted
> for our non-contract
> employees or are negotiated for any of our
> other organized employees, such more favorable
> terms, policies or
> arrangements will be provided to the Flight
> Attendants; if AFA so elects.
>
> 14. MONTH - pg. 2-3
> Should there be any changes made in the
> definition and application of "MONTH" for other
> flight crew members (Pilots)
> such changes will apply to Flight Attendants.
>
> 15. *PAIRINGS AND LINES* - pg. 9-1
> Monthly pairing and lines construction shall be
> the same as Pilots.
>
> 16. UNIFORMS - pg 6-3
> In accordance with Company uniform policy for
> other crew members (Pilots), Flight Attendants shall
> be provided a
> short sleeve shirt option(s) and Flight
> Attendants will not be required to wear jackets.
>
> 17. UNION BUSINESS PASS POLICY - pg. 26-2
> Should the Company agree to extend business
> pass improvements to other union representatives,
> such improvements
> shall be extended to AFA representatives.
>
> Here are some issues to thing about if your thinking
> about giving up the "ME TOO CLAUSE".
>
> DID YOU KNOW: Flight Attendants are not covered by
> Federal Aviation Regulation (only Pilots). If the
> government changes rest requirements or duty time,
> the only way the Flight Attendants will benefit is
> through the "ME TOO CLAUSE".
>
> DID YOU KNOW: Our trips WILL NOT be like America
> West trips (10 hour one days) because they are a
> regional carrier. We have more aircraft, different
> aircraft types, and go to many destinations. We can
> be utilized more efficiently
> than America West. The Company will be able to use
> the Flight Attendants longer in a 14 hour period by
> changing planes on to different equipment types.
> Ask any original Piedmont Flight Attendant that has
> already experienced this;
> how bad it was for them. They could change their
> trip as soon as they reported for duty, because they
> did not work with
> their Pilots. Ask them how bad it was for their
> junior block holder and reserve Flight Attendants.
> They also stayed in worse hotels than their
> Pilots. Do you really want to get rid of the "ME
> TOO CLAUSE"? Do you really want to experience worse
> working conditions?
>
> DID YOU KNOW: There are no Flight Attendant Unions
> that have better duty rigs than their Pilots.
> Pilots have extensive
> training and education, which equates to a better
> contract from the Company. We are blessed to have
> the "ME TOO CLAUSE" in order to benefit from the
> Pilot Contract.
>
> DID YOU KNOW: We have just benefited recently from
> the "ME TOO CLAUSE". First: We got 100% pay for
> deadheads (Pilots won their grievance). Second: We
> got international pay on domestic and international
> routes if you fly with an international trained
> Pilot.
>
> Now on to other issues. Here are some things to
> consider how incompetent our AFA contract
> negotiators are.
>
> DID YOU KNOW: Every contract Carol Austin
> negotiated since 1993, has been a concessionary
> contract. Every item the original USAir Flight
> Attendant negotiators worked hard to get for their
> membership was deteriorated by Carol Austin and her
> negotiating team. We use to have the best contract
> in the industry. This is why we need PROFESSIONAL
> NEGOTIATORS. Professional negotiators can not be
> compromised by the Company. United Pilots are now
> using professional negotiators, because of all the
> corruption in ALPA.
>
> DID YOU KNOW: The membership recalled Carol Austin
> in l995 as our MEC president. She gave the
> membership misinformation and non-information about
> our tentative l995 contract. WHICH WE WERE STRONG
> ENOUGH TO VOTE DOWN! She was working against the
> Flight Attendant group to push another concessionary
> contract through. She did not succeed and the
> membership recalled her instead. WHY is she still
> negotiating for us? There must be something in it
> for her. She's really hurting the membership. It's
> time to get her out of there again.
>
> DID YOU KNOW: Carol Austin files excessive expense
> reports every month and your MEC pays it. It's more
> than a Flight Attendant makes in pay per month.
> Ask your MEC to see her expense reports. It should
> be public record for the membership. They should
> publish all their pay and expenses, so the
> membership knows where their union dues are going.
>
> DID YOU KNOW: When negotiating a new contract your
> negotiators should look at ALL major airlines Flight
> Attendant Contracts. This is a guide line of what
> industry standard is. Unfortunately our so called
> negotiators keep working off of our concessionary
> and bankruptcy contracts, to make our new contract
> even worse. We are not even keeping up with
> industry standard. Our contract is probably the
> worst in the industry now. We are definitely the
> lowest paid. Mike Flores can not even get a buy out
> for the Flight Attendants. The Company just offered
> our Pilots a $70,000 buy out. What does that tell
> you? Don't loose the "ME TOO CLAUSE", because
> the Company gives more to the Pilots.
>
> DID YOU KNOW: Mike Flores and Carol Austin NEVER
> work on the line to experience the deteriorated
> working conditions they negotiated. Has anyone seen
> Carol Austin cleaning an aircraft or Mike Flores
> selling Al A Cart items? They think it's OK for you
> to do it. They think they will never have to come
> back on the line to work as a Flight
> Attendant. They love their cushy position in the
> MEC. Ask yourself this: Are they working for you
> or against you? It is time to recall these two,
> before they destroy our working conditions even
> more. Call your LEC to voice your opinion or
> nothing will change. Things are only going to get
> worse when they try to rush this new tentative
> contract through; trying to get rid of the "ME TOO
> CLAUSE".
>
> Here are some interesting facts:
>
> DID YOU KNOW: We used to be given a booklet
> detailing ALL the information we needed for the new
> tentative contract. When Carol Austin took over we
> were only given a summary booklet. We don't even
> know what we are voting for. It's not completely
> written out for us to make an informed decision.
> When we asked for a complete tentative contract,
> Carol Austin refused.
>
> DID YOU KNOW: Our voting period used to be 18
> days. In 2000 it was reduced to 7 days. This was
> done so we could not educate ourselves about the
> tentative contract. It prevents us from being able
> to ask questions and discuss the contract with each
> other. This is called rushing the vote. Is your
> Union working for you or against you?
>
> DID YOU KNOW: We do not have a secure voting
> system. Electronic voting systems can be
> compromised. The electronic system can not be
> challenged. Only paper ballots can be recounted and
> witnessed by the membership.
>
> In closing keep in mind: Cleaning aircraft -
> ABSURD, not being paid senior pay on the E190 -
> ABSURD, selling Al A Cart items for no more pay -
> ABSURD, 70% pay for our sick time - ABSURD, only
> being paid 4:00/3:30 for vacation - ABSURD, no snap
> back clause negotiated for every important item we
> gave up in the bankruptcy contracts - ABSURD,
> giving profit sharing to America West - ABSURD,
> cutting back on pay with no snap back clause -
> ABSURD, cutting back on our vacation with no snap
> back clause -- ABSURD, SIX YEAR Contract - ABSURD,
> Four years or more to negotiate - ABSURD (You can
> add your own thoughts to the list). This shows how
> incompetent our negotiating team is. WE NEED
> PROFESSIONAL NEGOTIATORS!!!!!
>
> REMEMBER: Voting down an unacceptable contract will
> not shut the airline down. Our executives do not
> want to lose their jobs either. This shows the
> Company we are not going to take it anymore. The
> negotiators and Company go back and negotiate a more
> acceptable contract. The Company does not want any
> disruption in service, because they do not want to
> loose profit. Do not be afraid to vote NO.
>
> I hope this information makes it clear how important
> the "ME TOO CLAUSE" is. JUST REMEMBER: If the "ME
> TOO CLAUSE" was not important, the Company would not
> want it out of our contract.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Suzie Udvari
>
> Candidate for Vice President CLT
>
> Print this and pass it on. Help get information to
> your fellow Flight Attendants. Thank you
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
 
OP
V

VAflyGal

Guest
With all due respect, I'm considering the source of this email. This woman has said some dreadful things to and about reserves and I'm not intimidated by her banter. That said, there are some good points. However it must be considered we lost our duty rigs because of 'me too" - we lost a ton of flying because of pilot scope (worst in the industry) and now displacements.
Thanks for sharing though.
I don't disagree with everything here.
 

ebwgs

Veteran
Contributor
Aug 23, 2004
584
185
The letter posted above was powerfully informative, and spot on as far as the issues that she is opposed to. What I would like to have read more of is how she would contractually improve the standard of living for our reserves as well as our blockholders. What is she and her supporters providing as an alternative to Flores/Austin? I'm open and all ears to anyone that can improve the standard of living for all of us on the property.
 

Pi brat

Veteran
Jan 25, 2007
8,038
5,350
With all due respect, I'm considering the source of this email. This woman has said some dreadful things to and about reserves and I'm not intimidated by her banter. That said, there are some good points. However it must be considered we lost our duty rigs because of 'me too" - we lost a ton of flying because of pilot scope (worst in the industry) and now displacements.
Thanks for sharing though.
I don't disagree with everything here.

I'm really trying to phrase this so it does come across as smart ..., but how much scope would you have without the pilot's scope clause? Could the AFA negotiated better scope for F/As alone than the pilots were able to keep and thus keep those aircraft on the property? I don't know, sometimes I wish they had been our union!

My significant other is a F/A and I have told her that I think you guys should look at giving up the me too with an open mind. Take a look at any TA that comes along and see if the total package adds up. The one problem that I see is getting good enough contract language to give up the FAA limits that come along with pilots(I know, sometimes that's good, sometimes bad). This management team has no problem using every poorly worded part of our contracts to their advantage. Just look at how they took 1/2 PNC for DH to mean that those trips would pay no rig!

Good luck, I hope you finally get what you deserve.
 

FlyOnWall

Senior
Mar 22, 2004
420
6
There are SO MANY mistruths, misconceptions, myths, and flat-out uneducated nonsense in that email posted above, one does not know where to begin. It's jaw-dropping.

I wouldn't leave that person alone on a beverage cart much less vote them into office armed with such a lack of BASIC contract knowledge.

Stupid people deserve stupid contracts...
 
OP
V

VAflyGal

Guest
There are SO MANY mistruths, misconceptions, myths, and flat-out uneducated nonsense in that email posted above, one does not know where to begin. It's jaw-dropping.

I wouldn't leave that person alone on a beverage cart much less vote them into office armed with such a lack of BASIC contract knowledge.

Stupid people deserve stupid contracts...

@ PI, our agents have better scope than the f/a's do, so yes, it's possible. And @ Fly, good post. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.