Thanks for the insight. One of those details that we sometimes forget. I was just going on your 5 hour average minimum day.
I was really just trying to make a point about a poster that made it sound like your job was a cake walk because you only work six days a month. I took it to mean that they were saying reserves led some life of luxury. The poster clarified their statement stating they were not speaking of reserves. They were just discussing the great flexibility that your current contract affords some to drop their trips on the trade board and using vacation to achieve this. This is fine for some folks. I am sure the people that do do this have another form of income from another job/business, spouse, inheritance or what have you. They are utilizing tools given to them in your contract. Some (reserves) don't have the option to pick and choose. That is where a disconnect between your work group begins.
The person with this flexibility has sometimes forgotten that there are folks among you that don't have the choices that they have. I think your work group has become fragmented due to the very nature of your contract. The poster was trying to be well meaning by stating they want a fair contract but that in there world at least, it was a pretty good gig. The economy is still not fully recovered and the grass is not always greener. Fair enough, but that just highlights the point that there is a whole segment of the Flight Attendant group that seems to be completely ignored in the negotiating process. I believe the contracts of the past always are based on the assumption that there is going to be movement upward. This is only achieved by growth of the airline or mass retirements. Neither one of these things are taking place at the moment. First you have a management team that seems to be running a convenience store rather than an airline. Second, you have some very senior people that unfortunately had their main source of retirement taken from them through bankruptcy so they are sticking around for a while longer to try to make up the difference. The negotiators seem to still be focusing on that upward moving scenario contract of the past that still is weighted toward that non existent upward movement. This was fine in the past when there was sustained growth. Everybody "Paid" their dues for a few months and you never look back from then on. Now look, you have folks on reserve this month with twenty years from my understanding. Your negotiators are living in the past. Only they know the reason as to why. There is always going to have to be some kind of reserve system. There is no way around it in this type of job. They should not have twenty years and they should not be treated like second class citizens either.
If I'm not mistaken Ann in CLT won by a very small margin correct? It is very possible that Cathy will win over Ann in CLT leaving Mike shaking in his shoes knowing the new LECP's of CLT and PHL won't be on his side. The membership wanted change yet it was ignored. If I were a sitting officer and a recall was tried but failed by only a FEW votes what would I do? Certainly not what this AFA group has done that's for sure. John knew members were pissed yet turned a blind eye. Mike knew it almost passed yet he turned a blind eye to ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE who voiced their discontent with AFA and it's direction here at US. If section 6 does not come to pass a recall of Mike and Carol will happen again I'm sure as they WILL NOT continue and better find a way to undo what they did.
