F/A Base closings

[laura62]

Also, it is very possible that later this year we will see the return of the very inexpensive Foreign Nationals. They will take some of the intra-Asia flying currently being done by NRT and HKG. So, NRT and HKG will have to take more of the flying to the states, to the detriment of the US bases.

Can the Foreign National side letter still be applied?

I thought once the "FNs" were gone that it had to be renegotiated...

 

[laura62]

The fact of the matter is, is that the vast majority of U.S.-based flight attendants did not seize the opportunity to be based abroad, when the opportunity was handed to us, for many years.



No, I didn't "seize" the chance to uproot my life, family, children, school, home for the "opportunity" to go to a foreign domicile.

didn't France (and perhaps other countries) want a certain number of French (local) citizens offered employment in the base? That lessened the "opportunity" for Americans did it not?

Then there were:

Some bases I couldn't hold.

Some bases I couldn't get a green card for.

Some wouldn't allow me to put my children into the public education system forcing me to pay for schooling for them out of pocket.

My dad was dying of cancer during some of the time these bases have been open for transfers. And the wonderful "opportunity" of being based thousands of miles away from him certainly wasn't appealing.


Lastly, anyone will have to admit; people with lesser seniority, based in foreign domiciles are working trips that US based f/as waited decades to be senior enough to hold but now can't because it's been "outsourced" AFA members or not it's outsourced.

flame away.

 

[JAMAKE1]

Look, I am merely pointing out that the opportunity existed for all of us in North America to go overseas. I have over ten years with United. A number of my friends and colleagues whom I went through initial training with, have gone abroad to fly international and experience living in a foreign country. Green cards were not needed and all of my friends who seized that opportunity are American.

I am just pointing out that Fly's postings have a number of misstatements that distort the truth. Nobody is getting "super seniority." When the company closes a base, transfers are usually frozen to accommodate flight attendants affected by the base closure, just as happened when HNL was downsized, MIA was closed, etc. To imply that the CDG flight attendants are enjoying super seniority is flat out false. Transfers are frozen until all of the displaced flight attendants can be accommodated. In the case of the CDG F/A's most of them can only go to where they have a legal right to work, which in this case is the E.U., so naturally they are being accommodated at LHR and FRA.

Furthermore, I will say it again. It is small-minded and disrespectful to publicly delight in the misfortune of the affected flight attendants being displaced. The fact is, the CDG flight attendants are our colleagues, belong to the same union, wear the same uniform as those of us based in N. America, and perform their jobs with a sense of pride and professionalism. I have flown with them a number of times and have found them to elevate the standard of our company to a higher level. I believe they are entitled to respect, regardless of what one's opinion may be regarding the controversial issue of foreign domiciles. Additionally, I find it tasteless to come on a public internet forum and express delight in their misfortune. Sometimes, it is better to keep such thoughts private. Enough said...

 

[mmahpeel]

Can the Foreign National side letter still be applied?

I thought once the "FNs" were gone that it had to be renegotiated...

Yes, the side letter is still applicable and I have no doubt it will come into play in short order.

 

[SoftLanding]

Wrong.

The UA F/As based overseas are covered by the same AFA agreement as those in the US and therefore have the same contractual vacation and (now-terminated) pension that US-based F/As have. The only difference would be any state-run pension scheme, but we have that here in the U.S. too, called social security.

I agree with Fly's point about the reserve base / guarantee pay being unfairly slanted towards non-U.S. based F/As (and those in HNL). Other than that s/he's distorting and omitting a lot, and Jamake nailed it.

Re retirement scheme: Soc Sec cannot be compared to the state retirement. Soc Sec would take most people below poverty, vs the state ret.

 

[Bear96]

Re retirement scheme: Soc Sec cannot be compared to the state retirement. Soc Sec would take most people below poverty, vs the state ret.

The main point was that F/As based outside the U.S. have the same employer-provided retirement (and vacation schedule, etc.) scheme as those based inside the U.S. My comment was in response to a post that made it sound like non-U.S. F/As did not lose as much as U.S. based F/As. No matter where you are based, in LHR or in ORD, if you were part of the UA F/A defined benefit plan (which all F/As, in and out of the U.S., were), you lost the same thing.

If you want to move off topic to a comparative analysis of state pension schemes across the globe ... I don't know how familiar you are with the state retirement schemes in other (non-U.S.) countries, but they are not as lavish as I suspect you may think they are. For example, under Thatcher the U.K. scheme was long ago indexed in a way that permits only very small cost of living increases compared to the U.S. system. The effect of that change is now manifesting itself for current British pensioners. That plus changes to the employer-provided retirement plan at BA has BA pilots threatening to strike in the next few months. (Sound familiar?) This is not to say social security in the U.S. is overly generous in any way.

In addition, almost all countries will be facing various funding crises in their retirement systems in the decades ahead, particularly in Japan and western Europe (where UA has F/A bases) due to the aging populations in those countries.