Of course they CAN but will they? They will keep the furloughs below the threshold to avoind WARN conflicts. AA also tried to say that the f/as were "only" part time employees and didn't fall under WARN protection. In Il and NY, there has to be a 90 notice. This is especially important since the union gave up furlough pay and turned the job into seasonal help.
FA PLOA Proffer Opened 11/11 For 1Jan to 31MAR
- Thread starter Skymess
- Start date
Of course they CAN but will they? They will keep the furloughs below the threshold to avoind WARN conflicts. AA also tried to say that the f/as were "only" part time employees and didn't fall under WARN protection. In Il and NY, there has to be a 90 notice. This is especially important since the union gave up furlough pay and turned the job into seasonal help.
I guess I am still not seeing why some here think AA is so scared of having to give a 90-day notice. An operation the size of AA would routinely be planning at least 90 days out.
In regards to FSD's on PAP flights, not only did we have the FSD we also had French speaker postion. The junior French speakers hated flying the trip and in JFK the 3 day trip originated for a while at EWR on the Airbus and that was the last straw. One by one they fell of International and are happily flying domestic to this day. This FSD system works well for us APFA and AA. I don't see it as a viloation of scope, they perform no F/A duty, I have more of an issue with a member of of management on board working as a F/A, thank goodness APFA made sure the Purser postion is first and foremost a line Flight Attendant, and only the Captian can ask safety related questions.
Bear, I'm going to try one last time, but you need to quit thinking about planning. It has NOTHING (nada, rien) to do with planning. Of course, the company plans the flying schedule months in advance. And, they continually tweak that schedule right up until the last minute. And, they know months in advance how many flight attendants they need (and by definition, how many they don't need) for that planned flying.
Ok? With me so far? You seem to think that they will announce the overage as soon as they know it. That would be incorrect. They do not announce an overage until the very last minute. If they were to announce tomorrow that there will be an overage of 500 f/as in January, a number of us who might be subject to that furlough might quit and go find another job. That would leave them short of flight attendants for the Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday travel season. Do you follow?
Now, about that "very last minute" to announce the furlough. That's what we are talking about. Let's say they announce on 31DEC09 that there is an overage of 499 f/as. That is the number subject to furlough. Of that 499, 249 or fewer are based in LGA or ORD. The company can furlough all of us effective 31JAN10--30 days notice; only 30 days on the payroll when they didn't need us. If the number subject to furlough is 500 total or greater, the Federal WARN act kicks in and they could not furlough us until 28FEB10--60 days notice; two months on the payroll for all of us when they didn't really need us. If more than 249 of the people subject to furlough are based in ORD or based in LGA, then that state's WARN act kicks in and they could not furlough us until 31MAR10--90 days notice; 3 whole months they would have to pay people they don't need.
I can't think of any way else to explain this. Again, it has nothing to do with planning. It has to do with how quickly they can get people off the payroll at their convenience; not the convenience of the employee or the union.
You are reading something into this that isn't there. You also seem to think that we are saying that the company cannot give 90 days notice. We are not, nor have we been, saying any such thing. It is not that the company cannot. They most certainly can. The point is they don't WANT to have to give 90 days notice when they can get away with 30 days notice.
Of course, they hated the trip. When they were recruited, they were led to believe that they would go immediately to International and be flying to Paris on a regular basis, or at the very least, be the French speaker on a Zurich trip. There was a young woman in my newhire class who quit training when she found out she was being assigned to ORD which was not even one of her choices for domestic base. We had already heard about the bid denials and the flying interminable Montreal turns month in and month out and not being allowed to drop or trade trips except with another poor French speaker.
And, of course, you don't see it as a violation of scope, and technically, it isn't because our contract does not specify that speakers must be flight attendants. But then, the average AA f/a never sees anything like this as a violation of scope as long as it is not his/her job that is being replaced.
The French Speakers I was talking about flew IFS plenty, not to mention quite often flight attendant French speakers often did and do fly as FSD's on PAP and that is in addtion to the bid 7 on the bus and now the 767 and an 8 if the flyig time requires it. SO there will be at time 7/8 flight attendants and up 2 FSD's and if the FSD is a F/A he or she is not on that flight .
What I was getting at was they droped the french speaker because it was hated on 3 day trips not turns and mostly Creole was needed.
What I was getting at was they droped the french speaker because it was hated on 3 day trips not turns and mostly Creole was needed.
Oh please. Are you really suggesting that a bunch of people will quit (and thereby forego unemployment benefits) just to avoid being furloughed, especially in this economy?
Are they itching to bag groceries at Piggly Wiggly for minimum wage?I think your paranoia and cynicism are getting the better of you.
But thank you, O Brilliant One, for being so patient with dunces such as me, in your ever-present condescending manner.
Oh please. Are you really suggesting that a bunch of people will quit (and thereby forego unemployment benefits) just to avoid being furloughed, especially in this economy?
I think your paranoia and cynicism are getting the better of you.
But thank you, O Brilliant One, for being so patient with dunces such as me, in your ever-present condescending manner.
They probably wouldn't quit but AA is probably very concerned about staffing over the holidays given the state of negotiations. There is a lot of different types of flu this season and I'm sure they want to be prepared so the public isn't incinvenienced.
As for the 90 day notice. Who knows why AA doesn't follow "the rules". Perhaps because they feel the rules are for everyone else and they are somehow exempt. It seems to tbe the "corporate culture" at AA.
Oh please. Are you really suggesting that a bunch of people will quit (and thereby forego unemployment benefits) just to avoid being furloughed, especially in this economy?
I think your paranoia and cynicism are getting the better of you.
But thank you, O Brilliant One, for being so patient with dunces such as me, in your ever-present condescending manner.
Maybe not, but they might just get very sick (cough, cough) and start using up their sick leave during the busy time of the year.
P.S. YOU are the one who asked the same friggin question 3 times even though it had been answered clearly to everyone but you. So don't get snarky.
