AFA labor discussion (Work related)

[crazylikefox]

I assume it was only required if they wanted to open early. He could have ignored the deadline and it would be status quo. At least that is what I am assuming. If he did anything right I guess this would be the one event no matter his motivation. The next question will be whether it makes it any further than meeting the filing deadline.

43 votes in Charlotte? Did the international office use the same formula they did for the recall vote? (Non voters are a vote for the incumbent?)

Forgive me, lest I not make myself clear. I simply wanted to point out to those who think that the JNC and MF had a sudden epiphany regarding how the negotiations were going were mistaken. Of course they were insulted, as were all of us. Nevertheless, no matter what their motivations, the filing was a mere formality. A hedging of bets, so to speak. They are now free to go either way. But I will point out that at the CLT meeting, Mike said that they would more than likely keep the language in all of the sections that were closed, not leaving room for much epiphany mind changing to go with the membership's wishes, ya think?
And, no. In a local election, only those who voted are counted. If you didn't vote...it doesn't matter one way or the other, unless you didn't get a ballot, could not obtain one, etc. This is what happened in CLT and is why we are having a re-run, as per the DOL, of the LEC President's office. Some members in CLT were denied their right to vote. The incumbent won by 43 votes, the number of members who were denied their voting rights exceeded that amount.
By the way, new ballots are out. They are due by Feb. 4. Everyone please exercise your right and vote.

 

[Travelpro72]

Let it NOT get lost in posts here that AFA Int'l is counting the signatures as we speak to recall John, Grace and Omar from Local 70. There were 874 signatures delivered which included 99 duplicates and a few not in good standing. Regardless, there are well over the 610 needed for recall. Signature validation is ongoing if not complete by now. This is quite sad actually as all the members wanted was for their elected officials to LISTEN and not be DICTATED to. Every watch Grace at a meeting? Talk about an unprofessional individual who is condescending and unfamiliar with how to conduct a meeting. Now John can take his ignorant/lying self to CLT, Grace his bulldog sidekick won't have to worry about "protecting" the members and Omar...well, who knows. This is going to trigger a HUGE change in direction so listen up people, VOTE FOR THE RIGHT PEOPLE! ! !

 

[DVolpe]

Alas, one point. The JNC only filed Section 6 because the deadline to do so was Dec 31st. This was not a show of heroics and muscle flexing by the JNC; it was required of them.

Just a clarification....the JNC did not file the Section 6 early opener. That was filed by the East MEC per the current East agreement.

Deborah Volpe
MEC Vice President/JNC Member
Council 66

 

[Onestep2flt]

Just a clarification....the JNC did not file the Section 6 early opener. That was filed by the East MEC per the current East agreement.

Deborah Volpe
MEC Vice President/JNC Member
Council 66

Deborah,

This is no personal attack on you, but I think you have just made clear what the problem many folks have on this issue. There are still two sets of MEC officers. I am pretty sure this has been brought up several times before. It is my understanding that the two MEC offices were to be merged into one quite a long time ago. Now going on five years there are still two sets of officers. While it is refreshing to have someone from the JNC come on this board to discuss these issues it brings very little comfort to my friends on the east who have had to endure the arrogance of an MEC leader that has all but ignored the very people that he is suppose to represent. All appearances indicate that he is less than honest with the folks on the east. I am not in a position to know but can guess that he is less than honest with you and the others on the west as well.

I believe that with your new international president in place it is perhaps time to to get some honest answers why this path was chosen in the first place. It seems that your union (AFA international) only follows the rules when it suits their needs. It is time for them to set the record strait as to why that is so. You folks might not be in such a predicament if this hadn't been the case.

I say again, I have much respect for the fact that you come on this board and share your insight. However, there is something hinky going on here and it needs addressed sooner rather than later.

Hope you will become a catalyst for a fair and equitable contract for ALL US Airways Flight Attendants.

 

[Sandy Eggo]

Deborah,

This is no personal attack on you, but I think you have just made clear what the problem many folks have on this issue. There are still two sets of MEC officers. I am pretty sure this has been brought up several times before. It is my understanding that the two MEC offices were to be merged into one quite a long time ago. Now going on five years there are still two sets of officers. While it is refreshing to have someone from the JNC come on this board to discuss these issues it brings very little comfort to my friends on the east who have had to endure the arrogance of an MEC leader that has all but ignored the very people that he is suppose to represent. All appearances indicate that he is less than honest with the folks on the east. I am not in a position to know but can guess that he is less than honest with you and the others on the west as well.

I believe that with your new international president in place it is perhaps time to to get some honest answers why this path was chosen in the first place. It seems that your union (AFA international) only follows the rules when it suits their needs. It is time for them to set the record strait as to why that is so. You folks might not be in such a predicament if this hadn't been the case.

I say again, I have much respect for the fact that you come on this board and share your insight. However, there is something hinky going on here and it needs addressed sooner rather than later.

Hope you will become a catalyst for a fair and equitable contract for ALL US Airways Flight Attendants.

The separate offices are not the result of actions by the East MEC. I believe it is part of the AFA's merger policy.

The AWA MEC/LEC is also culpable in the AFA Bad Romance at US Airways.

You are correct, there have been and are hinky things , but certainly not all of them of East design. References are available upon request.

Most of the silent centrist Flight Attendants are not looking only at the USAirways East/West AFA as a problem, but the AFA itself as a governing body that has fallen into the turpitude that occurs when an organization becomes insular and politically incestuous. The result is an archaic viewpoint of the membership and the industry.

It is unfortunate.

 

[john john]

culpable
hinky
turpitude
centrist
insular
incestuous
archaic

OK

 

[Zarah]

Having a combined MEC would be disastrous with two separate contracts. Just my opinion.

 

[DVolpe]

Deborah,

This is no personal attack on you, but I think you have just made clear what the problem many folks have on this issue. There are still two sets of MEC officers. I am pretty sure this has been brought up several times before. It is my understanding that the two MEC offices were to be merged into one quite a long time ago. Now going on five years there are still two sets of officers. While it is refreshing to have someone from the JNC come on this board to discuss these issues it brings very little comfort to my friends on the east who have had to endure the arrogance of an MEC leader that has all but ignored the very people that he is suppose to represent. All appearances indicate that he is less than honest with the folks on the east. I am not in a position to know but can guess that he is less than honest with you and the others on the west as well.

I believe that with your new international president in place it is perhaps time to to get some honest answers why this path was chosen in the first place. It seems that your union (AFA international) only follows the rules when it suits their needs. It is time for them to set the record strait as to why that is so. You folks might not be in such a predicament if this hadn't been the case.

I say again, I have much respect for the fact that you come on this board and share your insight. However, there is something hinky going on here and it needs addressed sooner rather than later.

Hope you will become a catalyst for a fair and equitable contract for ALL US Airways Flight Attendants.

One~

I don't take your valid concerns as a personal attack...not in the least.

I was suppose to get back to some FAs on the merging of the MECs and truth be told, I got side tracked
with the company's horrid compensation proposal. No excuse, I will try to comb through the C&Bs for more
clarification.

As you know, I try not to comment on the political climate of other Councils. Do I think it's sad there is so
much discord...of course I do. We've had our share at Council 66 over the past 10+ years. As always, there is
normally 4 sides to a story, "their side, the members' side, the political side and the untainted truth". Find me a
Council that can distinguish between those 4 things and I may myself go join them (slight humor intended).

Yes, I will agree that AFA International has had it's issues, especially over the past 5+ years. I guess the question
is, "Do we bail or do we get back to foundational issues and reconnect with the general membership?" I would rather
tear done my own house and rebuild, than find a different house where I don't know how it was built. As a
International Union and as Councils, we have forgotten the very basics in representation.......it's all about the members.

An elected leader has to go into their elected roles knowing their leadership role is a priviledge and not a birth right.
As willingly a leader takes office, that same leader should be able to leave their position (regardless of completion of term
in office, resignation or recall) with the same integrity as they took office. That goes for leaders on the local level as well as the International level. We have to remember that unions fail when the membership fails to make the leadership accountable.
I'm not referencing the climate on the East or West....just referencing the climate with general union membership.

Anyway, I'm hopeful we can still get this thing done. If I didn't believe so, I wouldn't be committing to another 3 years of working for the Flight Attendants.

Cheers,

Deborah

 

[songbirdstew]

A "pay raise" wont and cant replace the numerous BENEFIT cuts already taken. A "pay raise" cant replace that pension that was frozen. Nor the medical benefits in retirement that were terminated. Merger protections are a BENEFIT. Bargain those away with a raise and you've just been back doored by the company for the next merger.

Never give away rigs and benefits because you will never see them again. While I do not think we should be giving ANYTHING, if we do, it should be $$ because that they can always give that back.....and as far as I'm concerned, they owe us a TON.

 

[Onestep2flt]

Having a combined MEC would be disastrous with two separate contracts. Just my opinion.

Zarah,

Let me try to clarify. I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying. It may indeed be a disastrous situation. You do have to give careful consideration to this issue.

The point I was trying to make is that your constitution was not followed in regard to the merger policy. I don't pretend to know everything so there may be a valid reason for why it was carried out the way it was. That said, your union leaders are giving conflicting information when presented with these facts. It was and is the international presidents responsibility to explain to the membership why the proper protocol was not followed and under what authority was this carried out. Someone forwarded article X from your constitution and it is a good read. I would say to ALL Flight Attendants to take the time and read your constitution if you have not already. Anyway, article X spells out step by step how the union is to move forward in regard to union business as it pertains to your merger. There are protections spelled out addressing most of the concerns that people might have. These steps were ignored with no explanation given. Again, there may be valid reasons for this but no definitive answers have been given. Also, where does the authority come from to deviate from the constitution? Just looking for that Anderson Cooper moment.

Your concern as to having a combined MEC is a legitimate one. Not following constitutional procedure should be a concern as well. This is just a far out personal opinion on this, but this is what I see looking inward. You Have on the east an MEC president that from what is gathered here at least is a less than honest control freak. Along with his side kick Ms. Austin, who do think manipulates a large portion at the negotiating table? I am not saying that your counterparts on the west can't hold there own, but I am sure they sometimes have to rely on the word of a not so honest person when it comes to east contract concerns. To give one example of many, I would hope that your west counterparts would not sign off on the reserve section if they had all the facts. What is most likely a great improvement to them out west has put you in the dark ages. Just like the fact that your leaders feed you very little info, my thought is the same is happening in these negotiations. Mr. Flores has forgotten that the west leaders are on the same side.

A very complex situation that seems to have no answers. Hope all the other efforts you are taking are steps that will right the ship. Until then I would keep pressing the leaders you do have. Especially the new international president. Don't let them go hide out until the smoke has cleared and not take any responsibility. Somebody has some explaining to do.

 

[crazylikefox]

Just a clarification....the JNC did not file the Section 6 early opener. That was filed by the East MEC per the current East agreement.

Deborah Volpe
MEC Vice President/JNC Member
Council 66

Mea Culpa, mea culpa. You are right. The East MEC did. As did the West MEC, correct?
How could I have forgotten that we don't have now (and probably won't have in the near future) a single unified force in all of this mess.

I, for one, tire of the East said&did/West said&did mentality. I want cohesion. One unified front moving forward.

Even the smallest creature on Earth steps aside when they see a massive juggernaut in their path.

 

[DVolpe]

Mea Culpa, mea culpa. You are right. The East MEC did. As did the West MEC, correct?
How could I have forgotten that we don't have now (and probably won't have in the near future) a single unified force in all of this mess.

I, for one, tire of the East said&did/West said&did mentality. I want cohesion. One unified front moving forward.

Even the smallest creature on Earth steps aside when they see a massive juggernaut in their path.

Clfox~

The committee is unified in it's message and approach to the company's poor excuse for a compensation proposal. I just wanted to point out that just because the East presented the letter (per the CBA) to open Section 6, did not mean the West was not supportive....we were and still are absolutely supportive.

I think what gets lost in the "East" needs vs "West" needs vs every other "need", is this whole process (as we are experiencing) is unique. No other labor group/s has endured what our combined work force has endured.

As an Officer and member of the JNC I have to continuously remind myself that I'm negotiating issues that (today) may not be fully known or understood by someone based in PHX. If all we see and experience on a daily basis is West centric issues, then it's almost natural to focus on the one group. The challenge is to sit down and learn about issues I've never heard of or experienced. This is one of the reasons I have steady email communication with numerous East based FAs. It's truly the only way to get a real "360 degree" view of the issue.

Deborah

 

[crazylikefox]

Clfox~

The committee is unified in it's message and approach to the company's poor excuse for a compensation proposal. I just wanted to point out that just because the East presented the letter (per the CBA) to open Section 6, did not mean the West was not supportive....we were and still are absolutely supportive.

I think what gets lost in the "East" needs vs "West" needs vs every other "need", is this whole process (as we are experiencing) is unique. No other labor group/s has endured what our combined work force has endured.

As an Officer and member of the JNC I have to continuously remind myself that I'm negotiating issues that (today) may not be fully known or understood by someone based in PHX. If all we see and experience on a daily basis is West centric issues, then it's almost natural to focus on the one group. The challenge is to sit down and learn about issues I've never heard of or experienced. This is one of the reasons I have steady email communication with numerous East based FAs. It's truly the only way to get a real "360 degree" view of the issue.

Deborah

Deborah,
First of all let me say that I applaud you for trying to see all sides. And forgive me, but you see my mind follows logical thought, i.e. "if this, then that." So if you would allow me my small attempt at trying to understand all of this in a logical thought process, I might actually comprehend what you are telling me.

One: You said that this whole process is unique. In what fashion? I can name numerous mergers where very similar issues were resolved within a much shorter time period. The aviation industry is fraught with examples of two troubled airlines merging. What is unique is that this has taken a ridiculous amount of time.

Two: You said that you have a steady email communication with numerous East based F/As. If so, then how could you not know of the issues we have here? Better still, how could you not know that what was being signed off on was a huge step backwards for us? If you did, then did you express your concerns to the East negotiators or were you simply willing to let it go because the West was going to benefit?

Three: I do fear that the two sides are unified in their "message and approach" to this whole process. The probable reason why we are where we are. And in my humble opinion why we should have professional negotiators who work off answers the membership gave from the lovely survey we spent thousands of dollars on. They would prioritize from most important to least based on what the membership wanted and not from a few rank and files with their own agenda and egos to fill.

Finally, if you truly want to understand, may I suggest you take a moment and look at the POR, the 1st bankruptcy concessions, and the 2nd bankruptcy concessions if you've not done so already in your quest for a 360 view. Further interesting reading might be the minutes and other notes taken during the process and what the courts actually had to say. I can not quote verse and chapter, but over the years this was occurring I can assure you that I read these documents.

Sincerely,
C. L. Fox

 

[Twicebaked]

Seven days is all I can do since I work full time at a hospital and I'm in Grad school, plus I have three young children.

I am sorry, but...
If you are collecting full benefits from US you SHOULD NOT BE....
You may be getting them from the hospital, but I don't know

Where else can you work an average of 10 hours a week and get full benefits? NOWHERE
If it were up to me, I would do away with benefits for anyone that works less than 70 hours a month.. You would see lots go then...
Sorry, that is just my opinion....

 

[DVolpe]

Deborah,
First of all let me say that I applaud you for trying to see all sides. And forgive me, but you see my mind follows logical thought, i.e. "if this, then that." So if you would allow me my small attempt at trying to understand all of this in a logical thought process, I might actually comprehend what you are telling me.

One: You said that this whole process is unique. In what fashion? I can name numerous mergers where very similar issues were resolved within a much shorter time period. The aviation industry is fraught with examples of two troubled airlines merging. What is unique is that this has taken a ridiculous amount of time.

Two: You said that you have a steady email communication with numerous East based F/As. If so, then how could you not know of the issues we have here? Better still, how could you not know that what was being signed off on was a huge step backwards for us? If you did, then did you express your concerns to the East negotiators or were you simply willing to let it go because the West was going to benefit?

Three: I do fear that the two sides are unified in their "message and approach" to this whole process. The probable reason why we are where we are. And in my humble opinion why we should have professional negotiators who work off answers the membership gave from the lovely survey we spent thousands of dollars on. They would prioritize from most important to least based on what the membership wanted and not from a few rank and files with their own agenda and egos to fill.

Finally, if you truly want to understand, may I suggest you take a moment and look at the POR, the 1st bankruptcy concessions, and the 2nd bankruptcy concessions if you've not done so already in your quest for a 360 view. Further interesting reading might be the minutes and other notes taken during the process and what the courts actually had to say. I can not quote verse and chapter, but over the years this was occurring I can assure you that I read these documents.

Sincerely,
C. L. Fox

C.L. Fox~

Regarding mergers and the uniquness of our situation: Never in the history of AFA or to my knowledge any other unionized group (under the RLA) has a membership been forced to work under their initial CBA for as long as the West. Never has a membership (West), been in Section 6, only to be put in recess due to a merger in order to get to a joint agreement that has gone on for 5 years. And during that 5 years have the membership (West) request to go back to Section 6 only to have management say, "we won't bargain with you here, we need to come to an agreement in joint talks.

Put on top of that, a membership (East) who has endured not one, but two bankruptices. Bankruptcies that have seen pay, benefits, work rules and pension decimated. A membership that watched as their company was being managed into the ground by those in senior executives. Those same executives that managed to save their parachutes while your pension was tossed out the window.

Now toss into the mix a process (joint negotiations) that has no avenue for self help (strike or CHAOS). Add all of those items together and you have an atmosphere that can only serve as material for a business book on "What Not To DO". Our situation is indeed unique!

I joined the JNC the last week in May. That does not shield me from the past 5 years of joint negotiations, nor does it excuse my lack of "historic" knowledge of why certain language was negotiated. To say I had to hit the ground running was a bit of an understatement. At that time the Reserve Section was all but negotiated. Except for minimum days off (which in the end was moved to the Scheduling Section), the Reserve Section was complete. I soon learned that while this section would be an improvement for West FAs (there are some who are critical of the language), I truly did not understand the level of angst there was on the East. It didn't take long for me to read and hear the disappointment of our East co-workers.

The term professional negotiators is batted around alot in our industry. Our staff negotiator is a professional negotiator who works for the JNC. Any other professional negotiator would do the same.....take direction from the committee.

It is acknowledged that I have not read the notes from your bankruptcy. I have learned by talking to other members of the MEC along with Mike and Carol. I don't want to get pulled into the debate whether their membership feels they are effective. That is not my call. I work with them. I have to have a certain level of trust in their knowledge of the history of US Air/Airways along with the history of the concessions. They have to do the same in return. We will not let them dictate what they believe the West FAs want or need, just like I can't tell them the East doesn't want to split from the pilots. When they tell us this is critical, we have to believe that is the case. That is how this works. Remember, Lisa and I are trying to represent West interests, while Carol and Mike represent East interests. In the end you hope to get to a single agreement.

Now, I've said this before and will do so again with all the respect I can lend.......when a TA is put before you, that's the time to read, weigh and then vote. Should you like it, you vote yes, should you hate it, you vote no. I don't mean to simplify this as most of you have been through this more times than me. We loose our strength when we take our "laundry" and air it publically. I can't control who we negotiate with no more than the next person. I'm sure there are times with the East JNC wants to toss me out of a window. But in the end we have to bring this membership a TA to consider. Let me say this again....we have to give you a TA to consider. If we don't get to that place, there is no way we can convince management the reasons why we (JNC) might have been right in the first place.

The only things I can promise, is to do my best and be honest and up front. I'm not a politician. There's no political gain for me, in fact, it opens me up to a lot of flack when I post on web boards. However; we are in the age of wireless communication so it's either remain silent or try to communciate even if it means getting my butt put in the perverbial sling from time to time.

Respectfully,

Deborah
DVolpe78@aol.com
I'm also on Facebook