AFA labor discussion (Work related)

[Travelpro72]

PHLfa88, you are a terrible, terrible, terrible representation of ANYONE in the f/a group. You question FACTS that were given to the membership at an OPEN MEETING to members in good standing. Why does MF not put this information out? Why don't you email him and ask him that very question. We have all wondered the same thing. I also read the Eline about the results of the petition. I'll tell you what.....it sure looks like (even with fudged numbers) that A LOT of people are very upset with the direction of negotiations and those in charge of negotiating ie Mike and Carol. This certainly isn't a tiny group of "haters" as you put it. Luckily you are ONE person in the sea of many and the tide is turning. Swim hard my friend.....swim hard. 🙄

 

[VAflyGal]

Dude. Seriously. Wtf is wrong with you?
Some of us here are active in our membership and try to remain positive during what we perceive as challenging times. I'm at a loss for words to respond to you. You ought to support those of us who are trying to make a difference.
PS, what I post is not hearsay, rumor, or jumpseat gossip. I'm smart enough to do my homework, research the issues, question the gray areas, and challenge what doesn't make sense. Wish you were with us on this. It pains me to read your angry, misinformed blather.
But I love you anyway, and I'm sorry about what you just went through in the sky. All of you should be commended and I hope you are okay.

 

[VAflyGal]

Honestly, idk what to say. Part of me wants to be devil's advocate and say PHL is not thinking clearly considering the recent event. Part of me wants to scream "GO TO A F'N MEETING, FLYGUY" before you post incessant dumbassery on here. Seriously. 700 is a good person. Why would you berate him or her for the honest and open discussion we have here? Why would you accuse someone you've never met (me) of starting some rumor when the words have come from MF himself?
He's a smart man for not putting into print many things, including, and, to our detriment, his own RSV chair's e-line, which should have gone out weeks ago.
Truth hurts, doesn't it?
Please do us a favor and take a PCL or something. Seriously. I'm sure you are a nice guy but you are burying yourself here and clearly are a miserable human being at this point.

 

[Travelpro72]

Pretty accurate so far. 😉

 

[ganesha]

Pretty accurate so far. 😉

Wow, never did I think one little question would cause so much strife between a few peeps.

Anyway, back to the question: Why is the company hiring 300 F/A's? Retirements? Ah phoey! Something is up the company's sleeve and my speculation is that the new duty reg's for pilot's will come into effect before this whole contract mess is settled.

On the other hand, if the contract is settled, then the poor 300 will just be furloughed....

And on the other hand, why doesn't the MEC wait and see what good for the F/A group will come out of the new duty rigs...then we can have the company eatin out of our HANDZZZZZ. It does't take a fricken rocket scientist to figure that out. But then again, we are talking about M and C for goodness sake.

just my opinion

 

[Career Reserve]

Just wondering if anyone has seen this eline.


AFA - CWA US Airways MEC E-Line - "Staying Informed"


The AFA Newsletter for US Airways Flight Attendants

In this Issue November 29, 2010

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EAST MASTER EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
A Special Meeting of the US Airways AFA-CWA East Master Executive Council (MEC) was held this morning via teleconference. MEC President, Mike Flores, called the meeting to act on petitions circulated in the three domiciles to recall the MEC President and Joint Negotiating Committee member, Carol Austin.
The motion to recall failed. The MEC, in a roll call vote (as the petition called for) voted 2018 FOR Recall and 2253 AGAINST Recall.
The petitions were delivered to the AFA-CWA International Secretary Treasurer, Kevin Creighan on November 5, 2010. The AFA-CWA Constitution and Bylaws requires signature verification prior to any action. The verification process ensures that all of those who signed the petition were members in good standing, no duplicate signatures were counted and the signatures were counted in the correct Councils.
The AFA International Office completed the verification process last Friday and the MEC President was notified. A Special meeting of the MEC was called for on the first business day following that notification.
The results of the verification process revealed the following (by Council):
DCA – Council 41
Eligible Members 418
Signatures Received 252
Total Valid Signatures 186
PHL – Council 70
Eligible Members 1,950
Signatures Received 1,110
Total Valid Signatures 954
CLT Council 89
Eligible Members 1,903
Signatures Received 1,070
Total Valid Signatures 878
During this morning’s meeting, Council 41 President, Alin Boswell put forth a motion to recall the MEC President, Mike Flores and Joint Negotiating Committee member, Carol Austin via a roll call vote. Council 89 President, Ann Crowley seconded the motion. The following vote was recorded:
COUNCIL 41 FOR RECALL 186 AGAINST RECALL 232
COUNCIL 70 FOR RECALL 954 AGAINST RECALL 996
COUNCIL 89 FOR RECALL 878 AGAINST RECALL 1025
TOTALS FOR 2018 AGAINST 2253
Therefore Mike Flores and Carol Austin will continue in their current roles. Let it not go unnoticed the MEC acted upon the will of the membership.
Thank you,
The US Airways Master Executive Council
AFA-CWA

________________________________________

Who did the verifying of signatures at AFA international & how were they verified?
Sounds very suspect to me that just enough signatures were disallowed to keep them in.

Wasn't it international that "blew off" the f/a's who filed a complaint about CLT election? Wasn't Kevin the one who said their complaint was baseless therefore International wasn't going to do anything about it?

Well lookie here......DOJ thought better now didn't they? We having that election again!

And these are the same folks we are suppose to be trusting now with the verification of signatures?
This is like having the Fox guard the Hen house!!

I wonder, do we need the DOL to come in again?
jmho

 

[Travelpro72]

I'm sure the DOL will be contacted and rightfully so. Just look at those numbers? Total BS! ! 🙄

 

[PITbull]

What I would like to know is WHY these local presidents didn't abstain the votes of those f/as whose signatures the AFA International alleges they could not verify??????

That would have been the right thing to do. But, I think these 3 presidents figured this out because out of all those signatures 414 signatures, if abstained (taking them out of the entire rollcall votes), the recall WOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL. Who IS responsible for not using the absentions are these 3 local presidents. They must have purposely NOT used abstentions and ignored the demand of their respective bases and cast their votes to keep Flores and Austin in their positions! The good'ole boys club is still intact at AFA. What a bunch of arrogant bozos.

The way things look at USAirways AFA, these 3 presidents will never be reelected!

There is CHANGE in the air.

The International needs to take those 414 signatures that they say they can't verify, and call these f/as to see if they had indeed signed the petitions. This way, it will be crystal clear!

Maybe, that's why the International didn't do this. Flores should have waited to call the MEC special meeting and the local presidents should have directed the International Sec/Treas to call these f/as individually on the phone. They have staff that could have done this.

The MEC is purposely ignoring what the majority is demanding.

I say OFF with their heads!!!!

 

[PITbull]

So..The Recall Did not work! what's the next move for All the Haters out there? Another Petition? I'm sure you have a back up..back up ..back up plan right?

Well, I would think getting rid of the local presidents on the East would be in order. Looking at the signatures on the petitions, surely is enough votes to have a recall of officers in all three bases and cause another election to take place. Then, new administrations can simply recall Mike and Carol and all of the MEC officers. PHL, DCA, CLT LECPs et.al ....ba bye!!!!

 

[violet]

As for the LEC votes...... Did they have to split the votes? Could any 1 LEC cast ALL their base votes as a block in favor of recall? Or, why count the questioned signatures/non-signatures as AGAINST recall? Not everyone got the opportunity to sign the petition. Don't they usually use their whole block of votes for everything else?

I think this splitting the votes is just political cover the LEC. They really WANT to keep the status quo with Mike and Carol and did the math in advance. The vote allows them to say that their hands were tied and they tried since they dont want to take heat from their members. If they wanted to get rid of Mike and Carol they could have. Cowards.

 

[flybynite]

As for the LEC votes...... Did they have to split the votes? Could any 1 LEC cast ALL their base votes as a block in favor of recall? Or, why count the questioned signatures/non-signatures as AGAINST recall? Not everyone got the opportunity to sign the petition. Don't they usually use their whole block of votes for everything else?

I think this splitting the votes is just political cover the LEC. They really WANT to keep the status quo with Mike and Carol and did the math in advance. The vote allows them to say that their hands were tied and they tried since they dont want to take heat from their members. If they wanted to get rid of Mike and Carol they could have. Cowards.

A number of signatures were invalid. They were either duplicates or they weren't in good standing. That's what the verification process is all about. As it should be.

And yes, they could have thrown their block of votes for recall but they decided not to for a reason. All three LEC's voted their block of votes against recall. Something to think about.

And if a recall had passed, what do think would happen? Who would be in charge of our negotiations? Would our negotiations break down?(maybe) be delayed?(yes) play into the company's hands?(yes) IMO.

Just a few things to think about. Would anything change for those items that have been agreed to? No, I can assure you, the company will not revisit those items. If you don't like the contract vote it down. That's your choice.

 

[Itestwell]

Something to think about.

Please elaborate.

[quote/]And if a recall had passed, what do think would happen? Who would be in charge of our negotiations?[/quote]

New, qualified people would be voted in, of which there are many. Look what the people "in charge" of our negotiations have brought us thus far, after five years. Further concessions, and the TA is not even complete.

[quote/]Would our negotiations break down?(maybe) [/quote]

"Break down"? Along the line of talks between North and South Korea? I don't know, but negotiations would certainly be delayed while new negotiators are brought up to speed. "Break down" seems kind of dramatic.

[quote/]be delayed?(yes)[/quote]

Of course. But what's another few months? It's been five years, and look at what the JNC has brought thus far.

[quote/] play into the company's hands?(yes) IMO.[/quote]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I see it differently. If the East flight attendants have the organization within themselves to recall, that sends a message that the majority of the flight attendants are not happy with the direction of joint negotiations. In fact, I think that would send a pretty serious, clear message to the Company that we deserve better than what has been agreed to thus far. Maybe they need to be reminded that we are working under a double bankruptcy contract. I think the Company realizes that they need to get something done, and are not happy with the unrest out East. Doug Parker even addressed the recall in a recent Crew News Session, saying that it could cause delays and we "need to get something done".

[quote/]Would anything change for those items that have been agreed to? No, I can assure you, the company will not revisit those items. [/quote]

If the LECs chose not to send the TA out to the membership, they would certainly have to revisit "those items". I assure you.

[quote/]If you don't like the contract vote it down. That's your choice.[/quote]

So we should just be silent until we see the whole thing? We know a lot, and it's concessionary, and you can't argue that fact.

You deserve so much better.

 

[flybynite]

Please elaborate.



New, qualified people would be voted in, of which there are many. Look what the people "in charge" of our negotiations have brought us thus far, after five years. Further concessions, and the TA is not even complete.



"Break down"? Along the line of talks between North and South Korea? I don't know, but negotiations would certainly be delayed while new negotiators are brought up to speed. "Break down" seems kind of dramatic.



Of course. But what's another few months? It's been five years, and look at what the JNC has brought thus far.



You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I see it differently. If the East flight attendants have the organization within themselves to recall, that sends a message that the majority of the flight attendants are not happy with the direction of joint negotiations. In fact, I think that would send a pretty serious, clear message to the Company that we deserve better than what has been agreed to thus far. Maybe they need to be reminded that we are working under a double bankruptcy contract. I think the Company realizes that they need to get something done, and are not happy with the unrest out East. Doug Parker even addressed the recall in a recent Crew News Session, saying that it could cause delays and we "need to get something done".



If the LECs chose not to send the TA out to the membership, they would certainly have to revisit "those items". I assure you.



So we should just be silent until we see the whole thing? We know a lot, and it's concessionary, and you can't argue that fact.

You deserve so much better.

I don't have to elaborate about thinking.....that's up to you.

And just where do you think those people are going to come from? The LEC's. Back to square one. You aren't going to elect anyone...that's up to the LEC's. Our LEC's are the ones who choose.....that's their job.....Am I ringing your bell yet?

 

[Itestwell]

I don't have to elaborate about thinking.....that's up to you.

Are you referring to "thinking about" the LEC's? I believe that is being thought about, pretty hard, from the membership all the way to the DOL. Sorry, I misunderstood, didn't realize you were referring to that.

[quote/]And just where do you think those people are going to come from? The LEC's. Back to square one. You aren't going to elect anyone...that's up to the LEC's. Our LEC's are the ones who choose.....that's their job.....Am I ringing your bell yet?
[/quote]

Where did I say that I would be voting for anything? I said, "new, qualified people will be voted in". You make it sound like Mike and Carol are the only ones on the property capable of negotiating.

 

[flybynite]

Are you referring to "thinking about" the LEC's? I believe that is being thought about, pretty hard, from the membership all the way to the DOL. Sorry, I misunderstood, didn't realize you were referring to that.



Where did I say that I would be voting for anything? I said, "new, qualified people will be voted in". You make it sound like Mike and Carol are the only ones on the property capable of negotiating.

You're right..I misinterpreted what you where saying.

What I'm saying is, after everything has been said and done, we'll have damaged our negotiating process. Granted, we'll have said loud and clear that we don't like the direction of the contract talks.....and we've really done that already. They're on this board now and hearing it. And they can and will use it against us at the table.
I hate to say this....but this is like a game of poker. And if any of you out there know how to play you know what I'm talking about. He who blinks first loses.

No, I'm not saying Mike and Carol are the only ones out there that can do the job. But what I am saying is there is no point in changing horses in the middle of the stream either. And that's why the LEC's voted the way they did. IMO. We're on the back side of this negotiation. If it had been so important....we would have pulled them 4 years ago.