Eagle And Afa Reach Agreement

[Bob Owens]

I just had an Eagle flight attendant on my flight yesterday commuting to work. She told me that the TA stinks and she will be voting NO. She also informed me that everyone she had spoken to is also voting NO.

I really believe that the Eagle flight attendants will eventually go on Strike and/or C.H.A.O.S.!

[post="294490"][/post]​

Well at $17 per "flight hour " that means they are actualy only getting around $5 hr, or less, for hours worked. They have nothing to lose.

 

[LD max]

Overheard on an Eagle flight, a conversation between the F/A and someone with a copy of the TA who had just attended a MEC meeting; The TA provides for an additional $5 per hour for international flying, EXCLUDING Canada, Mexico, and the Carribean. Go figure.

[post="294450"][/post]​

That's pretty comical. I guess they are counting on the FA's not to read the fine print. Eagle doesn't fly anywhere internationally other than those places. Even so, if we did, I don't think the measly extra 5 bucks would cover the mass rioting in back for that international flight to europe or wherever in an RJ!
Hopefully, they will be wise to any tricks or strong arm tactics to try to get them to vote yes.

 

[nbmcg01]

That's pretty comical. I guess they are counting on the FA's not to read the fine print. Eagle doesn't fly anywhere internationally other than those places. Even so, if we did, I don't think the measly extra 5 bucks would cover the mass rioting in back for that international flight to europe or wherever in an RJ!
Hopefully, they will be wise to any tricks or strong arm tactics to try to get them to vote yes.

[post="294574"][/post]​

Never say never..Who knows what kind of agreements AA will strike with the pilots to allow more flow over to AE. And you never know, there may be an agreement that sends bigger planes to AE. And judging from the proactive behavior of the f/a union, it will happen without anyone blinking an eye...(except for the out of work former TWA f/as) Once again, never say never.

 

[czerny]

We lost our POs, no retro pay, just a signing bonus with a 40% gift tax.We also lost the ability to pick up portions of trips in OT.With this piece of paper, we are now required to fly the entire sequence from OT if we pick it up. I'm told by a union rep who was at the meeting in ORD that the MEC had a leverage that they never used. EMB company will not sign any contracts for the 170 with Eagle unless the FA contract was settled. I'm voting no and I know 5 others who will do the same. The MEC either needs to be replaced or go back and renegotiate.

 

[eolesen]

EMB company will not sign any contracts for the 170 with Eagle unless the FA contract was settled.

[post="294983"][/post]​

That only is leverage if there's no alternative.

For the sake of discussion, what's to say that EMB170 flying (if any) would automatically go to Eagle?

Is there a scope provision which prohibits Chautauqua or another carrier from flying 70 seaters under the American Connection brand?

Certainly, (gasp) AA couldn't fly the EMB170 or EMB190 using AA pilots without violating a scope clause?

 

[TimeOff]

Overheard on an Eagle flight, a conversation between the F/A and someone with a copy of the TA who had just attended a MEC meeting; The TA provides for an additional $5 per hour for international flying, EXCLUDING Canada, Mexico, and the Carribean. Go figure.

[post="294450"][/post]​

For the record...

the addition $5dls (per diem) are for international overnights, we have that right now.
We have and had this in our current contract only that now its in a new section of the TA. Nothing has changed....in other words if i fly to SXM and I overnight I get 5 dls more in my perdiem(not 5 dls more the hour; just 5dls flat). :down:

 

[AMFAMAN]

Do you have a spare IBT card?

[post="294442"][/post]​

http://www.teamsterslocal104.org/Files/TUAuthCard.pdf

Postage paid

 

[B.O.B.]

That only is leverage if there's no alternative.

For the sake of discussion, what's to say that EMB170 flying (if any) would automatically go to Eagle?

Is there a scope provision which prohibits Chautauqua or another carrier from flying 70 seaters under the American Connection brand?

[post="294988"][/post]​

American Connection is not part of AMR. They only fly in and out of STL. American Connection was part of TWA and flew under Trans World Express. They changed to American Connection when AA took over TWA.

 

[eolesen]

American Connection is not part of AMR. They only fly in and out of STL.

Which is exactly my point.

Is there anything prohibiting 70 seat flying from being allocated to AX?

American Connection was part of TWA and flew under Trans World Express. They changed to American Connection when AA took over TWA.

[post="295241"][/post]​

Not quite. By that time, all that TWA owned was TWE trademark. The existing airlines (Chautauqua, TransStates, Corporate-now-Regions) were and still are all independently owned and operated.

TWE was a standalone airline up until 1995, which is when it was merged into Chautauqua.

Prior to that, it was originally Ransome, which was bought by Pan Am in 1986, renamed Pan Am Express, and subsequently sold to Icahn in 1991 as part of the Pan Am liquidation/fire sale.

 

[FWAAA]

Which is exactly my point.

Is there anything prohibiting 70 seat flying from being allocated to AX?

[post="295306"][/post]​

Didn't AA lose the reverse codeshare dispute? I thought that AA lost twenty-some million dollars in an arbitration proceeding over that issue in the past year or so.

I thought the scope clause limited the number of 70 seat flying to the current total (67, including the 42 super ATRs and 25 CRJ700s), but I may be mistaken.

 

[IORFA]

I think you are correct FWAAA. I think APA still gets money every month as a penalty. I am sure APA would have no problem flying 170's or 190's. Maybe someone will go that route and ask them.

 

[eolesen]

IIRC, reverse codeshare dispute was under APA's scope clause, and had to do with the percentage of ASMs flown by regionals including Eagle.

If there's a scope limitation on 70 seaters being flown by non-Eagle regionals, it would have to be in the Eagle ALPA contract. Does such language exist?

I think APA still gets money every month as a penalty. I am sure APA would have no problem flying 170's or 190's. Maybe someone will go that route and ask them.

[post="295397"][/post]​

They're getting penalty money from Chautauqua, but that's because Chautauqua is flying 70 seaters for another major (US and UA) until they get the Shuttle America certificate approved for E170 operations.

 

[will fix for food]

I thought the scope clause limited the number of 70 seat flying to the current total (67, including the 42 super ATRs and 25 CRJ700s), but I may be mistaken.

[post="295328"][/post]​

IIRC they limited it to 50 70 seaters with an exemption for the ATR 72's. Technically Eagle could purchase and operate 25 more 70 seaters but they haven't because of the CRJ reliability problem and the lack of cash to buy them. That's what they are telling us at least.

 

[jimntx]

I don't know what you do for AA but, get a clue! Have you seen the TA? The current AE contract keeps them at the same pay for the first 5 years. Would you want to make $17 and change per flight hour for 5 years, without a raise?

A backlog of applicants would. That aside, even though they might not have a pay plan every year I would imagine that they get annual step increases. Not everyone at AE is at max because it is less common for AE employees to consider their jobs as careers. I'm not so sure that's a bad thing.

A little clarification...

The current AE contract (which technically expired 5 years ago/became amendable/whatever) does NOT call for 5 years at the same pay rate. And, Connected 1, no, there are no annual step increases in the first 5 years.

AE flight attendants get paid the 5th year pay step for the first 5 years. The contractual starting pay at AE is $12-something/hr. They were attracting "the blind, the halt, the lame, and the otherwise unemployable" at that rate.

A side letter with the union allowed the company to raise the starting rate until they got "acceptable" applicants. They raised it 4 times until they got to the 5th year pay step ($17-something/hr) before they started getting applicants they wanted to hire. The side letter raised everyone already employed, but not yet at 5 years, to the 5th year pay step. Anyone hired or already working then had to wait until the completion of their fifth year of flying before they got another hourly increase.

 

[TimeOff]

A little clarification...
\
AE flight attendants get paid the 5th year pay step for the first 5 years.  The contractual starting pay at AE is $12-something/hr.  They were attracting "the blind, the halt, the lame, and the otherwise unemployable" at that rate.


A side letter with the union allowed the company to raise the starting rate until they got "acceptable" applicants. 

CORRECTION AE F/AS START AT A 4 YEAR PAY SCALE ($17.67 PER FLT HR) NOT AT A 5 YEAR PAY SCALE.

AND

THERE IS NO SIDE LETTER....BUT ITS CURRENT BOOK LANGUAGE IN THE CONTRACT. :unsure: