Pay has always been negotiated last. Jim, I think you do a disservice to FA's saying they will only look at pay rates, before voting. Its been my experience that most go out of there way to listen to info reps and attend road shows. They take in to consideration how some articles will change their quality of life. It would be great if everyone was on the same page, but everyone has different priority's and needs.
apfa negotiations
- Thread starter jason77
- Start date
- Status
jimntx
Veteran
Well, good for you. I can only base my opinions on my observations of f/a behavior and comments at DFW and SLT. When I have tried to discuss negotiations with f/as I encounter, all they want to know is how much of a raise are we getting. When I say that hasn't been discussed yet, they say come back when you have something important to discuss.
jimntx
Veteran
It occurred to me how the company might do this. Instead of flying more days/mo, they would increase legs/day to 4 or 5 as a standard workday. Ouch! We have a sequence at SLT right now that is worth about 23 hours, but it is 4 legs/day for 3 straight days with short layovers IIRC. Do 4 of those in a month, and you have 92 hours, but still a 12-day line. And a serious case of complete exhaustion.
galleyguy4u2
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2003
- Messages
- 313
- Reaction score
- 2
Jim, we had those 12 day lines at TWA and they went really senior. You did work your arse off but you were home 18-19 days. I know that Nancy flew those STL-ANC turns. I would rather fly a 12 day line and recover at home with my family.
jimntx
Veteran
And, if you live in base I could see that. However, when you add a commute on top of that--especially with the capacity cutbacks that almost guarantee having to take a jumpseat if you even get on the flight--it makes it hard to do. I don't think I would. Too much like working for a living. 
And, when you add AA's passion for "non-credit airport appreciation seminars" that result in being on duty for 12.5 hours in order to get paid for 6, it makes it that much harder. Remember, Nancy's ANC turns didn't involve sitting in an airport somewhere for 2-3 hours between legs (unless, of course, there was a weather/mechanical delay).
And, when you add AA's passion for "non-credit airport appreciation seminars" that result in being on duty for 12.5 hours in order to get paid for 6, it makes it that much harder. Remember, Nancy's ANC turns didn't involve sitting in an airport somewhere for 2-3 hours between legs (unless, of course, there was a weather/mechanical delay).
Few days worked means more time at home and less trips to commute too. You have a duty rig that helps keep those long days from being worth nothing.
I am another who loved the long days. It could be a single leg 10 plus hour flight or one of those 3 leg 10 plus hour days. I stuck with international because most of the flights were longer. We had some pretty JR people at IMA and also at JFK.
I am another who loved the long days. It could be a single leg 10 plus hour flight or one of those 3 leg 10 plus hour days. I stuck with international because most of the flights were longer. We had some pretty JR people at IMA and also at JFK.
Jim I would probably say close to the same. Lets discuss whan you have hard facts and real numbers. I never got in to JS conversations about what someone heard someone say or what they here is on the table. It changes constantly. I would rather wait and see what my negotiating team put together for us. If I like I vote for it, If not I vote to send them back to the table.
What you see now may have a part in the final agreement but not to the extent that you see now.
Well, I remember when the 1999 TA was turned down, the biggest thing I kept hearing about was AVBL. Where I was based, that was reason #1 for the NO vote. Nothing else really mattered. Everything else was OK for the vast majority.
jimntx
Veteran
Mike, I'm an InfoRep. When I would try to discuss issues that the union had put out for comment, they still only wanted to talk about pay rates. And, I resent your implication that the things I was discussing were just js talk based on hearsay. What I posted here came directly from someone at the union. She got it internally and sent me only the parts of it where the company was "explaining their position." But then, I'm sure you discounted what I had to say simply because I'm "just a junior f/a. I'm sure he'll understand when he gets some seniority."
FrequentFlierCA
Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2008
- Messages
- 591
- Reaction score
- 35
PBGC is bust. No pensions for new hires is a must if the legacy carriers ever hope to compete evenly with their younger cousins like JetBlue and Virgin America. Pensions raise employee cost meaning that airlines that offer them have to charge higher fares to cover their costs. But if pricing power is controlled by discounters with lower costs (and for the US market it is) the legacy airlines end up selling their product for less than it costs them to produce it. Sound familiar?
jimntx
Veteran
Plus, if we eliminate the pensions, that frees up more money for the executive bonusses that are paid out whether or not the company makes money.
jimntx
Veteran
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that you voted against it because you opposed AVBL, or that the TA was going to eliminate AVBL and you liked it? Because, when I started in Sept., 2000 AVBL was very much in place and still is. In the 7.5 years I've been with the airline, I've held AVBL lines more often than a regular line. Or, was it just eliminated for International f/as?
I don't like exec pay any more than you do, but you really have to get your facts straight on this one. They have not taken a bonus in 5+ years. The PUP money are not classified as bonus, it is part of their overall pay package. And there is no "money" involved in those payouts, they are totally stock-based.
So money saved from pension contributions has nothing to do with executive pay.
jimntx
Veteran
Get a sense of humor. Take two, they're small. It doesn't matter what you call it--bonus, part of the pay package or a ham and cheese sandwich--the REALITY is that the PUP payments are rewards for doing not doing what executives are normally expected to do in order to gain "extra" pay (does that make you happy?)...lead the company to a profit!!!
John Thain at Merrill Lynch got fired for demanding a $10 million bonus because M-L's loss was "only" $4 billion. The basis for the PUP payments is as phony as a three dollar bill.
John Thain at Merrill Lynch got fired for demanding a $10 million bonus because M-L's loss was "only" $4 billion. The basis for the PUP payments is as phony as a three dollar bill.
- Status
