Since the other thread is very long I'm going to close it & start a new one.
Please read the board rules prior to posting. Thank you.
Please read the board rules prior to posting. Thank you.
AFA labor discussion (Work related)
- Thread starter Edward
- Start date
Twicebaked
Veteran
- May 22, 2003
- 1,788
- 18
Below is the latest regarding our "bigger" flight attendants...
No offense to those that are larger, but it IS about time it we crackdown on this issue....
2008-033-30-99-02 - Violation of Side Letter L25/ Performance Program/ Cabin Jump-seat Policy
Settled and Closed
The Company agreed to rescind The Flight Attendant Cabin Jump-seat Safety Policy published in May 2008. Due to the fact that the Company's FAA approved training program requires flight attendants to be able strap into the flight attendant jump-seat in order to maintain his/her certification, the parties agree that that a Flight Attendant who is unable to meet this function will be deemed unable to perform the essential functions of the flight attendant position. The flight attendant will be considered as not "current" under the performance standards established by the Company's Recurrent Training program as enforced by the FAA and such flight attendant's qualifications will be noted as "illegal". This determination will be consistent with any other flight attendant who is determined to be unable to meet the standards of the Recurrent Training program.
The parties further agree that the length of the seatbelts for the different aircraft type will comply with the aircraft manufacturer's specifications.
No offense to those that are larger, but it IS about time it we crackdown on this issue....
2008-033-30-99-02 - Violation of Side Letter L25/ Performance Program/ Cabin Jump-seat Policy
Settled and Closed
The Company agreed to rescind The Flight Attendant Cabin Jump-seat Safety Policy published in May 2008. Due to the fact that the Company's FAA approved training program requires flight attendants to be able strap into the flight attendant jump-seat in order to maintain his/her certification, the parties agree that that a Flight Attendant who is unable to meet this function will be deemed unable to perform the essential functions of the flight attendant position. The flight attendant will be considered as not "current" under the performance standards established by the Company's Recurrent Training program as enforced by the FAA and such flight attendant's qualifications will be noted as "illegal". This determination will be consistent with any other flight attendant who is determined to be unable to meet the standards of the Recurrent Training program.
The parties further agree that the length of the seatbelts for the different aircraft type will comply with the aircraft manufacturer's specifications.
WOW, who knew? Wasn't it always the case? Especially that you cannot use a SB ext. in the JS? I'm confused because I thought this was always FAA policy ....... someone please help me clafrify.
I know on the 737's out West it is a bench seat for 2 (how cozy) on the JS up at 1L. Many have had to be replaced, not only to age but to "oversized" seating capacity......
How long has this been going on?
Twicebaked
Veteran
- May 22, 2003
- 1,788
- 18
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 5:52 PM
Subject: PETITION TO DIRECT COUNCIL 89 OFFICERS TO INITIATE RECALL
We, the undersigned, being members in good standing of Council 70 of the
Association of Flight Attendants/CWA through these signatures are formally directing the Council 70 President to call a special meeting of the MEC within 48 hours upon receipt of this petition for the purpose of bringing a motion forth to recall Michael Flores, US Airways East MEC President and Carol Austin, US Airways East Merger Negotiator from their respective positions and to apply Article VII.C.3. In the event the Council 70 President or his designee should fail to comply with the aforementioned directive in carrying out the will of the membership, let this petition and signatures also serve to direct the International Secretary/Treasurer to call a special Local Council meeting in accordance with
Article III.D.3 and Article III.D.4 for the purpose of recalling all elected Council 70 officers and representatives from their respective positions in accordance with Article IX.C.
Contact Julie if you would like more info or sign the petition. let your voice be heard...its time for the Contract of Choice! No More Concessions....
Subject: PETITION TO DIRECT COUNCIL 89 OFFICERS TO INITIATE RECALL
We, the undersigned, being members in good standing of Council 70 of the
Association of Flight Attendants/CWA through these signatures are formally directing the Council 70 President to call a special meeting of the MEC within 48 hours upon receipt of this petition for the purpose of bringing a motion forth to recall Michael Flores, US Airways East MEC President and Carol Austin, US Airways East Merger Negotiator from their respective positions and to apply Article VII.C.3. In the event the Council 70 President or his designee should fail to comply with the aforementioned directive in carrying out the will of the membership, let this petition and signatures also serve to direct the International Secretary/Treasurer to call a special Local Council meeting in accordance with
Article III.D.3 and Article III.D.4 for the purpose of recalling all elected Council 70 officers and representatives from their respective positions in accordance with Article IX.C.
Contact Julie if you would like more info or sign the petition. let your voice be heard...its time for the Contract of Choice! No More Concessions....
BajaBabe
Veteran
- Aug 9, 2005
- 504
- 7
Is this recall for real?
I haven't yet seen a TA, I can't figure out how this group believes there have been concessions in this new tentative agreement yet to be published?
I would like to see specifics as to they grounds for the recall other than "we dont' like them". Are they doing something illegal? Are they not looking out for the best interests of their members?
I haven't yet seen a TA, I can't figure out how this group believes there have been concessions in this new tentative agreement yet to be published?
I would like to see specifics as to they grounds for the recall other than "we dont' like them". Are they doing something illegal? Are they not looking out for the best interests of their members?
I believe that is the point. They feel that their interests are indeed not being represented by the negotiators. My friend say that when questions are asked that Mr. Flores gets combative over things that should only require yes, no answers. When Carol bothers to show up at meetings she always says that she does not have anything to do with this or that. The secrets that have made there way to the public have come by the way of the west. When asked about those things Mr. Flores puts on his cloaking device and says this info can't be shared with the members. I got news for you, it already has and you are making it worse by not explaining it to your members properly. If I were in your shoes I would find it hard to believe much of what comes out of their mouth.
I also think that we read in one of these threads that they can be recalled for any reason. Fair or not, that is what is in your bylaws. I would think that your MEC president would be aware of this. I think if they want to save their jobs they have so explaining to do in regards to your contract.
There are many, many petitions going around the one I see most is the recall of Ms. Austin... the other one is the recall of Mr. Flores. Dose anyone even believe they will find someone better to represent them? Who is willing to stand up to the challange and get the job done that we want. I for one don't want it. Who wants to take their place? Does anyone know?
The perception on the West is that Mike Flores is actually more informative to his members than our MEC. I guess the grass is always greener on the other side, but it's also filled with weeds.
There has been some information shared to the west FA's, these are things that have already been negotiated, but are subject to change based on future hiccups in the process.
From what we have heard on the west, there really have been no concessions on in this agreement so far, in fact it appears that east is gaining a few benefits that the west has, and west is taking concessions, which west will not allow either.
For example:
West gets paid for cancelled flights, a-sectioned flights, any things that changes pay protects you. Not in the new TA, they are trying to tell the west that we would go to the "east way" of doing this. West does not like this at all.
West is losing the ability to have real time changes to schedules, instead we go the east way of the achaic, "wait for scheduling to call"....please! West would probably be ok with a seniority driven system, but not in manual process that east now uses.
Rumor has it the new system will be CATCREW which the west views as a big step backwards in time and technology. Even though west system has it's problems, it is point and click, window type technology, not DOS based ancient way.
West is being asked to think about the retirement policy for FA's that east has with traveling. West isn't keen to the idea of sa3p while retired, but again...east does it and has it.
West has had a meeting with members and will have more in the weeks coming, these are meant to inform the group, but it has it's risks too. I have not been to one yet, so im' just passing on things that have been galley chatted.
I don't know where people think Mike Flores is selling out the FA's, he seems to be standing firm on what east has and won't give in, except splitting from the pilots in the best interest of moving on.
There has been some information shared to the west FA's, these are things that have already been negotiated, but are subject to change based on future hiccups in the process.
From what we have heard on the west, there really have been no concessions on in this agreement so far, in fact it appears that east is gaining a few benefits that the west has, and west is taking concessions, which west will not allow either.
For example:
West gets paid for cancelled flights, a-sectioned flights, any things that changes pay protects you. Not in the new TA, they are trying to tell the west that we would go to the "east way" of doing this. West does not like this at all.
West is losing the ability to have real time changes to schedules, instead we go the east way of the achaic, "wait for scheduling to call"....please! West would probably be ok with a seniority driven system, but not in manual process that east now uses.
Rumor has it the new system will be CATCREW which the west views as a big step backwards in time and technology. Even though west system has it's problems, it is point and click, window type technology, not DOS based ancient way.
West is being asked to think about the retirement policy for FA's that east has with traveling. West isn't keen to the idea of sa3p while retired, but again...east does it and has it.
West has had a meeting with members and will have more in the weeks coming, these are meant to inform the group, but it has it's risks too. I have not been to one yet, so im' just passing on things that have been galley chatted.
I don't know where people think Mike Flores is selling out the FA's, he seems to be standing firm on what east has and won't give in, except splitting from the pilots in the best interest of moving on.
Zarah
Veteran
I just threw up in my mouth.
When I get the bad taste out I will attempt to write why the Dinosaur and the Meglomaniac need to go. We've gone over it a thousand times in this very thread before.
You shouldn't want any concessions period.
I hope someone beats me to explaining it. I'm nauseous.
When I get the bad taste out I will attempt to write why the Dinosaur and the Meglomaniac need to go. We've gone over it a thousand times in this very thread before.
You shouldn't want any concessions period.
I hope someone beats me to explaining it. I'm nauseous.
flybynite
Veteran
As I understand it, we will not continue with CATCREW. I may be wrong but I think they are working on a web based system. Subject to change, of course. 
Twicebaked
Veteran
- May 22, 2003
- 1,788
- 18
Twicebaked
Veteran
- May 22, 2003
- 1,788
- 18
No offense DesertFA66 but from what I hear the West always had a $h!tty contract. We, at one time, had one of the best in the industry.
We went through 2 bankruptsies and thus were handed to "concessionary" contracts....
That being said, what is being negotiated is based off of our "concessionsary" contracts and we WON'T stand for it...... That is why we see concessions and the West DOES NOT see it as that... We did what we had to to keep US Airways alive... It's pay back time now
Whatever this contract is, is a windfall for the West, but not the East... It is STILL concessionary in value!!!!!
So, I beg of you this... DO NOT vote yes just because the West gains a huge hourly wage increase!! Vote NO if things such as the reserve section don't work for you (even if you aren't reserve... how would it affect you if you were?). We all NEED TO VOTE THAT WAY!!!!
Similar threads
