8/12/2005
CWA'ers meet with America West execs and US Airways execs to discuss the impact of the merger on passenger service employees...
CWA'ers met on Thursday, August 11, with America West Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Jeff McClelland, US Airways EVP Jerry Glass and VP Al Hemenway, and senior management from operations, reservations, customer service and labor relations from both companies. Present for CWA were our local officers and staff.
America West EVP/COO McClelland opened the meeting saying that he is very confident about the new airline and the prospects for employees as we merge. He was upbeat and positive in his assessment of the ability of the new airline to provide a cost competitive, quality product to our customers and to compete successfully in the marketplace.
He also acknowledged that employees want to know a lot more about the overall operational plans for the airline, and also the impact of the merger on specific workplaces, locations and individuals. He agreed with us that employees are very optimistic about the new merger, and at the same time concerned about what might happen to them as individual employees as the merger process rolls out. He pledged to roll out information as quickly as it can be made available. At several points in our discussions various members of management referenced and acknowledged the protections provided in our CWA contract.
Management then responded positively to our CWA proposal of 7/29 that new openings at America West be offered to current US Airways furloughees instead of hiring off the street. Their response agreed with our original proposal to provide furloughed passenger service employees the opportunity go to an America West opening, at America West pay and conditions (currently lower) and then snap-back to the pay and conditions in our contract when/if that contract covered that work group.
We will be seeking to make some changes to the two management's reply-proposal in order to further protect recall rights and insure access to the grievance process, but we think this will lead in a short period of time to a good opportunity for our furloughees.
Management then made a proposal for what they termed "seamless service" at airports where both US Airways and America West employees are employed. Their idea is that both groups should be allowed to do each other’s work - cross-utilize - to provide efficient customer service. We said the goal of efficient customer service is extremely important and all agents and reps support it. We also pointed that understaffing at US Airways had greatly diminished customer service.
We said we would want to know much more about management's merger plans before beginning the "seamless service" discussion. For example, we wanted to know how many furloughs they anticipated, the staffing levels for these locations, the protection against job loss when you cross-utilize with people at a lower rate of pay, the rights of furloughed employees, etc. etc. These conditions could vary station by station and we said we would want to know the data for each location if we were going to have that conversation. Management agreed that the discussion should be entirely fact-based, and they agreed to provide that information to us. When we receive it we will be better able to reply to their proposal.
We then turned to the subject of res subcontracting. CWA has made a proposal (8/5/2005) to management to end the practice, especially in light of the fact that America West management has chosen not to subcontract their own res (at least not at this point).
CWA'ers pointed out case after case of customer complaints and inconvenience related to the vendor processing of res calls. The examples included incidents related by our own res agents and incidents reported by airport agents, including cases of customers arriving at airports trying to correct problems they had with vendor-res generated tickets and reservations. We stated the situation is getting out of hand and the res work should be brought back in-house and to maintain to professional standards and attempt to repair the damage done to our customer relations.
We called on management to say why they thought contracting our res calls to a non-airline company is a good business decision, given the bad impact it is having on the reputation of the airline, and why they shouldn't bring that work back in-house immediately.
One US Airways executive said that they wouldn't consider bringing res back in-house because the want to realize the savings gained by using lower-paid vendor employees. But, then, an America West executive stated emphatically that US Airways employees had, by their recent contract negotiations and ratification, made their pay and benefit package fully competitive, and in fact, he said, that was the significant factor in saving the airline and clearing the way for America West to pursue the merger. The message seemed different between the two execs. We intend to keep discussing this subject with management. We think logic and fairness support our position.
Management's agenda included a discussion of seniority integration. We told them we don't see how we can effectively discuss that until they provide us with the America West seniority list, by location, that we have requested. We said we need that data so we can assess for ourselves what the impact of the merger will be on the two workforces. They agreed to provide that list by early next week.
We also stated that we did not think it was a good idea for the executives to have issued their letter calling for a change in seniority to advantage America West employees in the merger process. We stated that the hire date system in our contract provides a fair and level playing field to all employees, and that it sounded to us like some were exaggerating the issue of seniority and polarizing the employees of both airlines.
We gave one major example: Many America West employees think our CWA/US Airways contract calls for furloughees to bump active employees out of their positions. That is not true, the contract does not permit that. We at US Airways know that, so we questioned why US Airways management would have allowed that statement to go uncorrected at America West. We stated that we would have expected US Airways management to set the record straight with America West management, and for America West management to set the record straight with America West employees. That hasn't happened and we think it is causing unnecessary stress between the two workgroups.
Finally, to prevent further conflict over seniority in the combined workgroup, we told management that we intend to explain and discuss our seniority procedures directly with the America West passenger service employees' representative (Teamsters Union) and try to reach agreement. America West management said they would encourage that approach.
Training on the HP computer system: We asked for a timeline on training for the HP computer system at airports. They told us that the locations would be grouped (group 1, 2, 3) according to when the training would take place. They said group 1 would be airports where America West passenger service is contracted out and the flights would now be handled by existing US Airways staff.
But then they stated that they didn't actually know which airports would be in groups 1, 2, and 3, and that it hadn't been figured out yet. They said they couldn't give any timeframe for when the training would start. We said we know for a fact that MCO, BDL and some other stations are starting training next week. But management insisted they didn't know what the training schedule is or that it hasn't been figured out yet. We didn't really know what to make of that response.
Again, we asked for, and management agreed to give us, specific information on several subjects:
Seniority data by location and classification for America West employees, so that we can compare seniority location by location;
Management plans and timelines for merging operations, location by location;
Management projections of employment levels and furloughs 3, 6, 9, and 12 months out, location by location.
The meeting ended with both sides agreeing it was a good exchange of ideas and information. We all expressed confidence that this new airline will be successful and we acknowledged that our goal was to have a secure and fairly-integrated workforce providing top quality customer service. That can happen successfully if all passenger service employees are confident that they are a valued part of the equation, and not just targets for cost-cutting and efficiencies. We'll work hard toward that goal.
By the way, America West Customer Service Director Mike Shambun has been traveling to stations around the system to assess and make arrangements for the passenger service merge. He says he has gotten a great reception from US Airways agents and wanted to convey his thanks to agents for the very cooperative approach.
CWA'ers meet with America West execs and US Airways execs to discuss the impact of the merger on passenger service employees...
CWA'ers met on Thursday, August 11, with America West Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Jeff McClelland, US Airways EVP Jerry Glass and VP Al Hemenway, and senior management from operations, reservations, customer service and labor relations from both companies. Present for CWA were our local officers and staff.
America West EVP/COO McClelland opened the meeting saying that he is very confident about the new airline and the prospects for employees as we merge. He was upbeat and positive in his assessment of the ability of the new airline to provide a cost competitive, quality product to our customers and to compete successfully in the marketplace.
He also acknowledged that employees want to know a lot more about the overall operational plans for the airline, and also the impact of the merger on specific workplaces, locations and individuals. He agreed with us that employees are very optimistic about the new merger, and at the same time concerned about what might happen to them as individual employees as the merger process rolls out. He pledged to roll out information as quickly as it can be made available. At several points in our discussions various members of management referenced and acknowledged the protections provided in our CWA contract.
Management then responded positively to our CWA proposal of 7/29 that new openings at America West be offered to current US Airways furloughees instead of hiring off the street. Their response agreed with our original proposal to provide furloughed passenger service employees the opportunity go to an America West opening, at America West pay and conditions (currently lower) and then snap-back to the pay and conditions in our contract when/if that contract covered that work group.
We will be seeking to make some changes to the two management's reply-proposal in order to further protect recall rights and insure access to the grievance process, but we think this will lead in a short period of time to a good opportunity for our furloughees.
Management then made a proposal for what they termed "seamless service" at airports where both US Airways and America West employees are employed. Their idea is that both groups should be allowed to do each other’s work - cross-utilize - to provide efficient customer service. We said the goal of efficient customer service is extremely important and all agents and reps support it. We also pointed that understaffing at US Airways had greatly diminished customer service.
We said we would want to know much more about management's merger plans before beginning the "seamless service" discussion. For example, we wanted to know how many furloughs they anticipated, the staffing levels for these locations, the protection against job loss when you cross-utilize with people at a lower rate of pay, the rights of furloughed employees, etc. etc. These conditions could vary station by station and we said we would want to know the data for each location if we were going to have that conversation. Management agreed that the discussion should be entirely fact-based, and they agreed to provide that information to us. When we receive it we will be better able to reply to their proposal.
We then turned to the subject of res subcontracting. CWA has made a proposal (8/5/2005) to management to end the practice, especially in light of the fact that America West management has chosen not to subcontract their own res (at least not at this point).
CWA'ers pointed out case after case of customer complaints and inconvenience related to the vendor processing of res calls. The examples included incidents related by our own res agents and incidents reported by airport agents, including cases of customers arriving at airports trying to correct problems they had with vendor-res generated tickets and reservations. We stated the situation is getting out of hand and the res work should be brought back in-house and to maintain to professional standards and attempt to repair the damage done to our customer relations.
We called on management to say why they thought contracting our res calls to a non-airline company is a good business decision, given the bad impact it is having on the reputation of the airline, and why they shouldn't bring that work back in-house immediately.
One US Airways executive said that they wouldn't consider bringing res back in-house because the want to realize the savings gained by using lower-paid vendor employees. But, then, an America West executive stated emphatically that US Airways employees had, by their recent contract negotiations and ratification, made their pay and benefit package fully competitive, and in fact, he said, that was the significant factor in saving the airline and clearing the way for America West to pursue the merger. The message seemed different between the two execs. We intend to keep discussing this subject with management. We think logic and fairness support our position.
Management's agenda included a discussion of seniority integration. We told them we don't see how we can effectively discuss that until they provide us with the America West seniority list, by location, that we have requested. We said we need that data so we can assess for ourselves what the impact of the merger will be on the two workforces. They agreed to provide that list by early next week.
We also stated that we did not think it was a good idea for the executives to have issued their letter calling for a change in seniority to advantage America West employees in the merger process. We stated that the hire date system in our contract provides a fair and level playing field to all employees, and that it sounded to us like some were exaggerating the issue of seniority and polarizing the employees of both airlines.
We gave one major example: Many America West employees think our CWA/US Airways contract calls for furloughees to bump active employees out of their positions. That is not true, the contract does not permit that. We at US Airways know that, so we questioned why US Airways management would have allowed that statement to go uncorrected at America West. We stated that we would have expected US Airways management to set the record straight with America West management, and for America West management to set the record straight with America West employees. That hasn't happened and we think it is causing unnecessary stress between the two workgroups.
Finally, to prevent further conflict over seniority in the combined workgroup, we told management that we intend to explain and discuss our seniority procedures directly with the America West passenger service employees' representative (Teamsters Union) and try to reach agreement. America West management said they would encourage that approach.
Training on the HP computer system: We asked for a timeline on training for the HP computer system at airports. They told us that the locations would be grouped (group 1, 2, 3) according to when the training would take place. They said group 1 would be airports where America West passenger service is contracted out and the flights would now be handled by existing US Airways staff.
But then they stated that they didn't actually know which airports would be in groups 1, 2, and 3, and that it hadn't been figured out yet. They said they couldn't give any timeframe for when the training would start. We said we know for a fact that MCO, BDL and some other stations are starting training next week. But management insisted they didn't know what the training schedule is or that it hasn't been figured out yet. We didn't really know what to make of that response.
Again, we asked for, and management agreed to give us, specific information on several subjects:
Seniority data by location and classification for America West employees, so that we can compare seniority location by location;
Management plans and timelines for merging operations, location by location;
Management projections of employment levels and furloughs 3, 6, 9, and 12 months out, location by location.
The meeting ended with both sides agreeing it was a good exchange of ideas and information. We all expressed confidence that this new airline will be successful and we acknowledged that our goal was to have a secure and fairly-integrated workforce providing top quality customer service. That can happen successfully if all passenger service employees are confident that they are a valued part of the equation, and not just targets for cost-cutting and efficiencies. We'll work hard toward that goal.
By the way, America West Customer Service Director Mike Shambun has been traveling to stations around the system to assess and make arrangements for the passenger service merge. He says he has gotten a great reception from US Airways agents and wanted to convey his thanks to agents for the very cooperative approach.
