April FA Attrition

[AAStew]

It isn't about retirement...While we are vested, we only get credit for the time on AA's property. In my case, one year. Dollar per hour may factor because AA doesn't want to pay top dollar for anyone much less those of us acquired in the "deal'. Why pay top dollar when they have only to wait for the APFA to keep signing LOAs that "help" with staffing shortages until the furloughees lose their recall rights. Maybe the APFA will agree to a "C" scale and AA will have everything they want and they will not have had to give away a single thing.

When exactly does the first TWA furloughee lose recall rights? ANd how about the last?
I really don't see AA recalling any of these furloughees back. It is almost universally agreed upon on the line (and silently in the offices) that this will not happen.

 

[s80dude]

When exactly does the first TWA furloughee lose recall rights? ANd how about the last?
I really don't see AA recalling any of these furloughees back. It is almost universally agreed upon on the line (and silently in the offices) that this will not happen.

The first natives, hired after the aquisition, fall off the list at the end of september. Then I believe it is a staggered number of TWA people for a few years until July 2008 when the bulk will have reached their five years.

I can't see how American can go until 2008 until a recall, but they seem hell bent on it.

 

[jimntx]

When exactly does the first TWA furloughee lose recall rights? ANd how about the last?
I really don't see AA recalling any of these furloughees back. It is almost universally agreed upon on the line (and silently in the offices) that this will not happen.

What you mean is that AA f/as don't want the former TW f/as to come back because all of us know deep down inside that the APFA (and we by our silence)screwed over the TW f/as, and we're scared to death that some court somewhere might decide in their favor.

And, I would like to know what level "in the offices" you are referring to. At the levels that matter, nobody really cares whether or not the former TW f/as come back.

First off, if you think that the company can maintain its plans for expansion and not recall any flight attendants for 2 more years, particularly given the fact that attrition is eliminating approximately 1000 f/as per year, then you must be smoking some good stuff these days. Right now as we enter June, 2006, there are approximately 1000 fewer active flight attendants than there were in June, 2004. I could give you a better number, but I lost my sheet with the attrition for the 2nd half of 2004. I do remember that both November and December, 2004 saw an attrition rate of over 100. There have been 705 of us recalled since June, 2004. The attrition rate for just 2005 was 885.

Now, at the top of the company they know--despite the denial levels of f/as--that if they want to recall more than 96 people in the next two years they will HAVE to recall some former TW f/as. And, assuming the 25% rejection rate the company has gotten to the last two recalls, then the former TW f/as will start showing up after number 72 (96 - (96 x .25)).

And, you can just forget that argument that "the company doesn't want to recall all those old f/as that are at top of scale." The company doesn't care. The f/as who are leaving are top of scale. The f/as who would be coming back are top of scale. It is a zero sum operation for the company payroll. For that matter, almost 75% of the currently active f/as are at top of scale or within 2 years of being top of scale. It's an expensive group of employees any way you want to cut it.

Instead of hoping that the former TW f/as are not recalled, you should be hoping and praying that AA stays independent and doesn't end up having to merge or sell itself to stay alive. A lot of REAL union organizations around the world are gunning for the APFA and its members. Can you say stapled to the bottom of British Airways seniority list?

 

[AAStew]

What you mean is that AA f/as don't want the former TW f/as to come back because all of us know deep down inside that the APFA (and we by our silence)screwed over the TW f/as, and we're scared to death that some court somewhere might decide in their favor.

And, I would like to know what level "in the offices" you are referring to. At the levels that matter, nobody really cares whether or not the former TW f/as come back.

First off, if you think that the company can maintain its plans for expansion and not recall any flight attendants for 2 more years, particularly given the fact that attrition is eliminating approximately 1000 f/as per year, then you must be smoking some good stuff these days. Right now as we enter June, 2006, there are approximately 1000 fewer active flight attendants than there were in June, 2004. I could give you a better number, but I lost my sheet with the attrition for the 2nd half of 2004. I do remember that both November and December, 2004 saw an attrition rate of over 100. There have been 705 of us recalled since June, 2004. The attrition rate for just 2005 was 885.

Now, at the top of the company they know--despite the denial levels of f/as--that if they want to recall more than 96 people in the next two years they will HAVE to recall some former TW f/as. And, assuming the 25% rejection rate the company has gotten to the last two recalls, then the former TW f/as will start showing up after number 72 (96 - (96 x .25)).

And, you can just forget that argument that "the company doesn't want to recall all those old f/as that are at top of scale." The company doesn't care. The f/as who are leaving are top of scale. The f/as who would be coming back are top of scale. It is a zero sum operation for the company payroll. For that matter, almost 75% of the currently active f/as are at top of scale or within 2 years of being top of scale. It's an expensive group of employees any way you want to cut it.

Instead of hoping that the former TW f/as are not recalled, you should be hoping and praying that AA stays independent and doesn't end up having to merge or sell itself to stay alive. A lot of REAL union organizations around the world are gunning for the APFA and its members. Can you say stapled to the bottom of British Airways seniority list?

You know what Jim?I think you are getting senile in your old age. When did I state that I personally don't want them back? As for insulting me about smoking stuff or thinking anything, I was just stating the rumor on the line. You know this very well.
As for wanting them back, it would only help me to have these f/a'scome back.
Since you chose to insult me and apply this personally to me,I will do the same you.I think you may need to take your meds as you are babbling. You old geezer!

The first natives, hired after the aquisition, fall off the list at the end of september. Then I believe it is a staggered number of TWA people for a few years until July 2008 when the bulk will have reached their five years.

I can't see how American can go until 2008 until a recall, but they seem hell bent on it.

Thank you. It sure looks like that is what they are aiming for. Unfortunately it is hurting us in the middle the most.

 

[s80dude]

i think what jim was talking about was the sentiment on the line. for the life of me i cannot figure out why our co-workers are so hell-bent on not wanting the TWA folks back on the line. some buy into the "they will fly one trip and retire with a full pension" but i correct them and remind them that their TWA pensions were separate and they only get what they have accrued while at AA.

it would behoove all of us to hope for as many recalls as possible. it's a sign of growth and that things are turing around. it will also mean some better quality of life issues as the movement will help everyone on the seniority list.

 

[AAStew]

i think what jim was talking about was the sentiment on the line. for the life of me i cannot figure out why our co-workers are so hell-bent on not wanting the TWA folks back on the line. some buy into the "they will fly one trip and retire with a full pension" but i correct them and remind them that their TWA pensions were separate and they only get what they have accrued while at AA.

it would behoove all of us to hope for as many recalls as possible. it's a sign of growth and that things are turing around. it will also mean some better quality of life issues as the movement will help everyone on the seniority list.

Yes,I do the same.The reason I asked for the dates is that alot of them think everyone will lose recall rights this Fall. I tend to remindthem the the furloughs were staggered so it won't happen.
I understand that Jim was talking about the sentiment on the line, but he also attacked me. He doesn't know me, and should not have attacked me personally, that's all.

 

[L1011Ret]

This fall, the AA F/As hired after the TWA acquisition will be the first to lose recall rights, then a bunch of the junior TWA F/As will lose recall rights. Subsequently groups of TWA F/As will be lose recall rights thru July 1, 2008 when the most senior of the TWA F/As will lose recall rights.

 

[kirkpatrick]

When exactly does the first TWA furloughee lose recall rights? ANd how about the last?
I really don't see AA recalling any of these furloughees back. It is almost universally agreed upon on the line (and silently in the offices) that this will not happen.

Here is a list of the dates and numbers when recall rights expire:

10/1/2006 875
10/7/2006 290
1/31/2007 214
10/13/2007 147
11/1/2007 430
1/31/2008 325
4/1/2008 317
5/1/2008 244
7/2/2008 1195

The first to go are the natives hired after the acquisition. The remaining are TWA people until you get to the 7/2/2008 group, which contains the 98 or so natives who are still furloughed.

As far as feelings and sentiment on the line, the driving force behind recalls boils down to simple need, not emotion. When bodies are needed on the airplanes, they will be recalled, regardless of TWA or not. Personally, I can't conceive of how the company could possibly go another 25 months without a recall unless some huge downsizing is planned, and I don't think there are any such plans.

MK

 

[jimntx]

Yes,I do the same.The reason I asked for the dates is that alot of them think everyone will lose recall rights this Fall. I tend to remindthem the the furloughs were staggered so it won't happen.
I understand that Jim was talking about the sentiment on the line, but he also attacked me. He doesn't know me, and should not have attacked me personally, that's all.

You should get a sense of humor. (Take two, they're small.)
If you thought that was a personal attack, you are way too sensitive to be a flight attendant. Your knickers must be in a twist on a daily basis.

Oh, Oh, Oh! I'm going to file Rule 32 charges. You called me a geezer and senile. I'm crushed. I may not be able to eat my prunes this morning.

Personally, I can't conceive of how the company could possibly go another 25 months without a recall unless some huge downsizing is planned, and I don't think there are any such plans.
MK

I saw an article the other day that suggested that the company was downsizing domestic based upon the fact that a couple of years ago, International revenue made up 30% of total corporate revenue, and now it is something like 36%. Personally, I think that just indicates that International can charge more realistic fares than domestic, and therefore generates more revenue.

 

[TWAnr]

First off, if you think that the company can maintain its plans for expansion and not recall any flight attendants for 2 more years, particularly given the fact that attrition is eliminating approximately 1000 f/as per year, then you must be smoking some good stuff these days.

I don't know if the company can get by for two more years without recalling flight attendants with the current work rules; however, based upon recent history it is quite safe to assume that the so-called union will sign concessionary letters of agreement which will require that all flight attendants to be qualified on all equipment and then, if necessary, implement cross utilization of domestic and international before a single former TWA flight attendant is recalled. Those two measures may reduce the headcount needs sufficiently to permit operating at the present level without recalls until all the red headed stepchildren have fallen off the recall lists.

 

[kirkpatrick]

I saw an article the other day that suggested that the company was downsizing domestic based upon the fact that a couple of years ago, International revenue made up 30% of total corporate revenue, and now it is something like 36%. Personally, I think that just indicates that International can charge more realistic fares than domestic, and therefore generates more revenue.

It's the overall size of the airline, not the dom/int mix, that concerns me the most. For example, months ago the company announced domestic capacity would drop 4% 2006 over 2005, but that international would go up by 4%. I can live with that.

International growth is actually better for recalls than domestic, since international flights still have meals in coach, and more elaborate FC and Business services which require more FA's. Some time ago I posted the average pax/FA ratios on domestic vs international flights. I seem to recall it was in the 40's for domestic, but more like the twenties on international.

Maybe someone could help out by providing me the following info, and correcting anything I may have wrong:

dom -

MD80 - 3 FA's
737 - 3
757 - 4
767-200 - ?
767-300 - ?

int -

777 - ?
A300 - ?
737 - 4 (sometimes 5?)
767-300 - ?

MK

 

[jimntx]

I don't know if the company can get by for two more years without recalling flight attendants with the current work rules; however, based upon recent history it is quite safe to assume that the so-called union will sign concessionary letters of agreement which will require that all flight attendants to be qualified on all equipment and then, if necessary, implement cross utilization of domestic and international before a single former TWA flight attendant is recalled.

What you are forgetting (or may not know) is that the only thing more important to the Blessed Order of the Perpetually Trip-Removed on Useless Boulevard (dba APFA)than avoiding recall of former TW flight attendants and hiding financial information from the membership is protection of perks for the senior flight attendants.

There are a lot of senior f/as who have dropped their quals on the S80 which is the backbone of the fleet. In fact, there are quite a few who today are qualified on the 767 and the 777 only. Making them requalify on the S80 and the other "lesser" a/c would cause a lot of grief for the BOPT-R (see above). Also, it would really chap their senior fannies that junior flight attendants would be qualified on their a/c.

And, for most of them they dropped their S80 quals long enough ago, that a mere review of door operation at EPTs would not suffice for the FAA. There would have to be the basic classroom time again. I don't think the company wants that many top-dollar f/as sitting in class for 4-5 days drawing training pay. It would be cheaper to have top dollar former TW f/as flying trips and being productive.

 

[kirkpatrick]

however, based upon recent history it is quite safe to assume that the so-called union will sign concessionary letters of agreement which will require that all flight attendants to be qualified on all equipment and then, if necessary, implement cross utilization of domestic and international before a single former TWA flight attendant is recalled.

I have a couple of problems with that scenario. First of all, there has only been one letter of agreement signed which reduced staffing on the 737 and some extra positions on the MD80 and transcons/Hawaii. In that case the company could have unilaterally implemented their desired staffing levels without APFA agreement, but chose not to in order to avoid any subsequent expensive arbitration proceedings, which they may have lost (this comes from my source at AA).

Second, I honestly don't believe that APFA, in general, doesn't want us back or that the average FA on the line doesn't want us back, either. Each one of us who returns is $41 per month in APFA's pocket, and we're junior to all natives flying, so our return will help push them off reserve. Of course, there are a few hotheads both in and out of the union, but they don't bother me. We have our own hotheads, as well.

As for cross utilization, there is absolutely no support within the FA ranks for such a change. Practically the entire contract would have to be rewritten to implement such a drastic change. The company would have to train thousands in ditching procedures as well as A300 and 777 quals, and they'd have to keep them current. It would take months or years to set up.

Finally, if the company wanted such a change, why has no mention of it been made so far? It wasn't proposed in the 2003 concessionary talks or since then. I can't see the union opening negotiations early for the purpose of arguing over something no one seems to want.

I can't say cross utilization will never come, but I don't think it can come in time to prevent at least some of us from being recalled.

MK

 

[jimntx]

Maybe someone could help out by providing me the following info, and correcting anything I may have wrong:

dom -

MD80 - 3 FA's
737 - 3
757 - 4
767-200 - ?
767-300 - ?

MK

Brace yourself, Mark, my boy. I can't tell you the International staffing, but I do know the domestic staffing. Unless otherwise notified, you can go with FAA minimums on ALL a/c.

767-200: minimum staffing is 4.
767-300: minimum staffing is 5.
777: minimum staffing is 8. (Yes, we do have a teensy little bit of domestic 777 flying.)

There may be some extra f/as added to the 757 and 767 for transcons, but us mid-continent f/as don't ever get to fly those. Since the last set of BOPT-R concessions which included elimination of VM (variable manning) positions, the only time I have seen more than FAA minimum on an a/c is for charters which ask and pay for extra f/as. (Oh, excuse me, the BOPT-R did not call those concessions. It was exceptionally canny negotiations with the company--to settle a grievance that WE won.)

 

[kirkpatrick]

767-200: minimum staffing is 4.
767-300: minimum staffing is 5.
777: minimum staffing is 8.

From playing with BidPro, it looks as if 757 transcons go with 5, 762's with 8 and 763's with 9, more or less. As for the 777, with minimum staffing based on 1 per 50 seats, wouldn't FAA minimums be 5 (not that it could actually be done with any level of service)?

So it looks to me like most domestic flights have pax/FA ratios of about 40-47/1, transcons around 30/1 and international about 20-25/1.

So I'd say international expansion will bring back more people more quickly than domestic.

MK