Area Of Concession?

[diogenes]

It is possible to make large $$ as an agent, but;

1. They are few and far between, and not the norm.

2. They are only in large station; that volume of ot is not available in the out stations. Class II stations ot budget is frequently 100 hrs per month, and that's for c/s and fleet. I've seen needed shift go uncovered, rather than bust the budget.

3. To make anything north of $60 k, you'd have to live at the airport. Did this guy have a camper in the parking lot?

 

[Harry Callahan]

Believe it or not this guy use to make quite a bit over 100 grand but with concessions & all that it is down to the $90.'s now & yes he did spend more time at the airport than I would ever want to think of.....

 

[diogenes]

Here's a little ot history as it relates to agents.

Pre-contract, ot was supposed to be distributed on an equalized basis. That is, if you were awarded ot today, and ot was available tomorrow, that ot must be offered to me prior to you. That way, everybody gets an equal bite at the apple. If the ot were awarded to you in error, I could protest it. If I won the protest, I was awarded a like amount of ot to be worked at a later date, thus acing someone else out of their spot in the rotation.

There were problems with this approach. The company controlled all the documents.Access was difficult. And if you insisted, you'd pay for it later - unfavorable duty assignments, unfavorable schedule, etc. Think I'm kidding? I SAW a supervisor look at the weather channel, verify the next few days would be monsoonal, and then fill out the duty roster. Everybody on his hit list got ramp duty. His boys got operations and bag room.

The other problem was, if I should have been awarded the ot today, I want to work it today - not later. This led to the last problem. The company would make damn sure the ot awarded to rectify the bypass was very inconvenient for the agent.

And did I mention favoritism? It's child's play to manipulate ot. If your boys are working today, and a flight is running a bit late, you extend their shift. If your 'list' is at work, you determine the work can be performed without the extra help, and you don't offer ot. Simple, and just one of a dozen ways to legally manipulate the system.

What this led to was reluctance on the part of the employees to press this issue - just what the company wanted.

The contracts changed only two things. The union would verify that the equalization records were accurate, and then the company would call out the ot. And, bypasses would be paid as if the ot had actually been worked. The company protested this last requirement as onerous, and convinced the union to delay this language until they could 'reprogram' the computers to handle this task.

Now, all of this leads to some interesting thoughts.

First, in all but the large stations, daily ot activity is recorded on paper, not in a computer.

Second, even in the computerized locations, NOTHING CHANGED. Bypass occurred, and was accounted for, prior to any contract. The only difference was, the employee got paid when the bypass was awarded, instead of getting paid when the bypass was worked.

So the 'computer ate my homework' was always a weak reed.

I also know an upper management type blew a gasket when the 'pay for bypass' language remained in the contract, which begs this question.

Why blame the employees? The company calls out the ot. If done correctly, there should never BE any bypass. But rather than train and discipline their own, the Palace would rather take it out on the employees. I am unaware of any management type being disciplined for repeatedly violating equalization procedures, pre or post contract.

It is no surprise management went after this during BK. IIRC, they stated it cost about a MILLION a year to pay bypass ot.

You'd think an unneccessary expense such as this would have been rectified a long time ago, but RATHER THAN FIX IT, managment wants employees to absorb the costs. I believe the company NEVER intended to act in good faith on this issue.

Sadly, there was always a simple solution. Let the company determine what overtime should be awarded when - they stay in control of the budget. Let the union call out the ot; i.e. determine WHO will work the ot. A win-win, yes?

The fact the company would not agree to this is indicative of the larger labor/managment issues. They want total control over employees, even when it costs them $$$.

It's probably too late for this attitude to change, but if it doesn't, we're done for. And if it doesn't, I don't care if we're done for.

 

[diogenes]

going to the front page!