Developmentally Challenged

L1011Ret

Veteran
Oct 31, 2002
1,326
0
APFA SPECIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING JULY 28, 2003

Resolution Tally Sheet
Resolution: #2
Maker: Mallon
Second: Trautman
Date: 7/28/03
Time: 1130

YES 18
WHEREAS, with the implementation by American Airlines of the FAA minimum layover, our membership has begun to experience severe health repercussions due to sleep deprivation and the inability to obtain food either on the aircraft or on a layover, including but not limited to extreme fatigue; and

WHEREAS, American Airlines Pilots are not subjected to these same FAA minimums; and

WHEREAS, these hardships can and do interfere with a flight attendants ability to effectively perform their FAA mandated security duties; and

WHEREAS, there has been a unified effort on Capitol Hill to voice concern and force legislation to mandate an increase in FAA minimum layover rest time.

BE IT RESOLVED, that Representatives from the APFA shall meet with American Airlines to attempt to obtain a remedy; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if American Airlines chooses not to respect Flight Attendants as safety professionals on board the aircraft, and if American Airlines chooses not to respect Flight Attendants health and well being; and

THEREFOR BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the APFA begin a campaign to join the movement to petition Congress to increase the federally mandated layover rest including but not limited to fly-ins to Washington to Capitol
Hill, an active writing campaign including through use of Capwiz, dedication on the APFA Website to this issue and whatever tools deemed necessary to be successful in this endeavor.

Now APFA has argued to the Congress that the deregulation of the airline industry left matters up to the managements, unions and stock holders to resolve. APFA clearly stated that Congress be hands off in the TWA seniority case. But now they negotiated something they do not like and want the Congress to resolve it? They are unable to take responsibility for their own actions. APFA acts like children who appeal to their parents for things the parents rightfully expect the children to resolve. As far as the maturity of a union goes, it can be measured by their accountability and responsibility to their union leadership, constitutents and those institutions to which they must responsibly interact. APFA his developmentally challenged.
 
Why yes it is, but posting on the bottom of it would of took some of the intended impact out of the rant.
 
Thank goodness that all the TWA flight attendants are history. Now they don't have to put up with such a lousy and "developmentally challenged" union. Being furloughed must be a much better situation for them?
 
This is amazing. A union that knew “exactly what to do†when it came to how to treat the TWA F/As during and after the “integration†can’t seem to agree on how much rest is required on a layover.

Maybe success affected the thought process. APFA got its way with the seniority, the no furlough pay and the reduced medical, and now they could do no wrong. Apparently, their own working conditions, momentarily, were not as important as seniority and salary. Oops, maybe that was a mistake.

What will we do now? Well, on that “other†thread, the safety card was played. For good measure, the possible affect on passenger service was tossed in there.

It really was time to start a new thread to attempt to learn NOT why the union agreed to this change, but WHY it is believed that whatever is not to their liking CAN be changed.

There are a lot of ex- TWA employees who would probably like to change a few things, but that’s a dead horse. We’re learning to “get over it.†Maybe some of you will like that 8 hour rule. Sleep fast and keep smiling at those passengers.


Randy Kramer
1.gif
 
"Thank goodness that all the TWA flight attendants are history."
*****
MiAAmi, That pretty well sums it up. That's all that you and you're union ever wanted anyway....Why do you always seem so angry with us? We're the ones that are on the street?
 
----------------
On 8/5/2003 3:46:47 PM TransWorldONE wrote:


"Thank goodness that all the TWA flight attendants are history."
*****
MiAAmi, That pretty well sums it up. That's all that you and you're union ever wanted anyway....Why do you always seem so angry with us? We're the ones that are on the street?

----------------​

I never said anything about wanting anyone gone. I would never wish anyone lose their job. The APFA bashing on this board by TW'ers never ends. TW'ers have expressed that they want to take our seniority from us. There is a law suit pending on this issue. You wonder why AA'ers feel the way they do? Lets face it, the TW deal was a bad one. It pitted everyone against each other and the TW'ers got the raw end of the deal. TW should have been allowed to fold on their own. That way you would only have your own management to blame. Lets also try and remember that there are over 6000 AA flight attendants on furlough. TW'ers are not the only flight attendants on the street right now.
 
----------------
On 8/5/2003 3:23:02 PM and 4:11:44 PM MiAAmi wrote:


Thank goodness that all the TWA flight attendants are history.
*****
I never said anything about wanting anyone gone.
----------------
Come on! Make up your mind. You cannot have it both ways.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #10
Point One: Of the 6000+ about 4200 are TWA. If there was no TWA deal then probably 4000 AA natives would be furloughed. So TWA was a "furlough cushion" for nAAtives. A point investigated in Court.
Point Two: TWAers never said they wanted to take your seniority. But they have said thet they would like to have the seniority to hold flights approximating what they brought to the merger. Let us say there were 20,000 natives before the merger. If you are seniority number 10,000 pre merger you are at the 50th percentile. If there are 24,000 F/As after the merger and 2000 of the TWAers were put on the list above you, now you are 12,000 on a 24,000 list. Same relative seniority, that is the 50th percentile. Any number of ways of altering this percentile relationship could be effected highly advantageous to the natives. For instance in the above example add 1,000 TWAers above the 10,000 premerger number. Now you are 11,000 on a 24,000 list. You are now in the 45th percentile on the combined list. So you moved up considerably in percentage terms. The idea that someone could take your seniority is preposterous. No arbitrator or fact finder would disadvantage AA natives that way.
 
Nice try Billy!

Tell that to someone who is borderline furlough. With the close to closing of STL in Nov. Where is all the additional flying that TW brought?
 
----------------
On 8/5/2003 5:35:14 PM TWAnr wrote:




----------------
On 8/5/2003 3:23:02 PM and 4:11:44 PM MiAAmi wrote:


Thank goodness that all the TWA flight attendants are history.
*****
I never said anything about wanting anyone gone.
----------------
Come on!  Make up your mind.  You cannot have it both ways.

----------------​

Its called SARCASM folks. Read the entire post!!!!!
 
----------------
On 8/5/2003 5:46:20 PM L1011Ret wrote:

Point One: Of the 6000+ about 4200 are TWA. If there was no TWA deal then probably 4000 AA natives would be furloughed. So TWA was a "furlough cushion" for nAAtives. A point investigated in Court.
Point Two: TWAers never said they wanted to take your seniority. But they have said thet they would like to have the seniority to hold flights approximating what they brought to the merger. Let us say there were 20,000 natives before the merger. If you are seniority number 10,000 pre merger you are at the 50th percentile. If there are 24,000 F/As after the merger and 2000 of the TWAers were put on the list above you, now you are 12,000 on a 24,000 list. Same relative seniority, that is the 50th percentile. Any number of ways of altering this percentile relationship could be effected highly advantageous to the natives. For instance in the above example add 1,000 TWAers above the 10,000 premerger number. Now you are 11,000 on a 24,000 list. You are now in the 45th percentile on the combined list. So you moved up considerably in percentage terms. The idea that someone could take your seniority is preposterous. No arbitrator or fact finder would disadvantage AA natives that way.

----------------​

A few points there would not likely be 4000 more naatives on the street. AA would already be a smaller carrier. There would have been cuts and furloughs. Not, to this extent though.

The math for your seniority merge doesn't pass evenly through the entire spectrum. If you are at the top or the bottom of the list you see a greater drop, in relative seniority. Since the vast majority of the TW flight attendants had time in excess of 30 years. They would have top loaded the AA seniority list pushing all others lower.
 
----------------
On 8/5/2003 6:12:43 PM FA Mikey wrote:

The math for your seniority merge doesn't pass evenly through the entire spectrum. If you are at the top or the bottom of the list you see a greater drop, in relative seniority. Since the vast majority of the TW flight attendants had time in excess of 30 years. They would have top loaded the AA seniority list pushing all others lower.

----------------​

You're assuming a DOH integration. A more reasonable integration formula could result in every native having a higher percentile on the list and the TWA people receiving at least a few crumbs for our decades of service.

MK
 
----------------
On 8/5/2003 5:53:45 PM MiAAmi wrote:

With the close to closing of STL in Nov. Where is all the additional flying that TW brought?

----------------​

Blended in throughout the system, as was the plan all along. There are 27 757's flying around out there, along with 75 MD80's, and 28 MD80's parked and ready to be pressed into service when the traffic calls for it.

MK
 
Back
Top