FA TA voted down
- Thread starter algflyr
- Start date
BungeeJumper
Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Messages
- 56
- Reaction score
- 46
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
AFA Q&A - www.ourafa.org - Merger Page
Wouldn’t we be better off if waited for the merger and had our change in control snapbacks kick in?
No. There are at least a couple of issues here. First, we don’t know if there will be a merger, or if there is, what it will look like – who the surviving management will be. And the longer we wait for a wage increase, the longer it will take to ever catch up. Second, the language in the contract in Section 30.O states in the event of a change in control the “Flight Attendant wage rates will snap back to the rates in effect on June 30, 2002.” The wage rates in effect on June 30, 2002 were $43.93. As you can see, we are better off with the $47.15 wage increase in the TA than with the East contract language.
We keep dancing around the seniority issue with a possible merger with American. Where do we stand? Date of hire or fair and equitable? If we are slotted we could be in the bottom half or bottom 4th of the seniority list which in an economic downturn, we would be more likely to be laid off–that what worries me.
There’s no dancing. The AFA Constitution and Bylaws clearly affirms support for date of hire. Also, the two unions have put out a joint statement pledging to work together on integration issues, including seniority. Keep in mind that “fair and equitable” refers to a process and “date of hire” is one of the processes that is fair and equitable – the two are not mutually exclusive. Also, we have scope and LPPs to protections in the East contract which would be extended to cover West FAs if the TA passes.
Did you get apfa to agree not to screw us over in reference to seniority like they have done to everyone else over the years?
Without commenting on your premise, the AFA and the AFPA released a joint statement on August 30, 2012. It is posted on the AFA website. The two unions have been discussing the consequences of a potential merger and have agreed to cooperate for the benefit of the FAs. Additionally, the McCaskill-Bond Amendment now governs airline mergers and provides that if different unions represent Flight Attendants, seniority integration must be done in a fair and equitable manner.
Why isn’t DOH in a merger included in scope?
The short answer is that a contract between the AFA and US Airways cannot be binding upon a third party. Section 1.D states that the AFA merger policy applies if both Flight Attendant groups are represented by AFA. The AFA Constitution and Bylaws is the controlling document and references DOH.
Wouldn’t we be better off if waited for the merger and had our change in control snapbacks kick in?
No. There are at least a couple of issues here. First, we don’t know if there will be a merger, or if there is, what it will look like – who the surviving management will be. And the longer we wait for a wage increase, the longer it will take to ever catch up. Second, the language in the contract in Section 30.O states in the event of a change in control the “Flight Attendant wage rates will snap back to the rates in effect on June 30, 2002.” The wage rates in effect on June 30, 2002 were $43.93. As you can see, we are better off with the $47.15 wage increase in the TA than with the East contract language.
We keep dancing around the seniority issue with a possible merger with American. Where do we stand? Date of hire or fair and equitable? If we are slotted we could be in the bottom half or bottom 4th of the seniority list which in an economic downturn, we would be more likely to be laid off–that what worries me.
There’s no dancing. The AFA Constitution and Bylaws clearly affirms support for date of hire. Also, the two unions have put out a joint statement pledging to work together on integration issues, including seniority. Keep in mind that “fair and equitable” refers to a process and “date of hire” is one of the processes that is fair and equitable – the two are not mutually exclusive. Also, we have scope and LPPs to protections in the East contract which would be extended to cover West FAs if the TA passes.
Did you get apfa to agree not to screw us over in reference to seniority like they have done to everyone else over the years?
Without commenting on your premise, the AFA and the AFPA released a joint statement on August 30, 2012. It is posted on the AFA website. The two unions have been discussing the consequences of a potential merger and have agreed to cooperate for the benefit of the FAs. Additionally, the McCaskill-Bond Amendment now governs airline mergers and provides that if different unions represent Flight Attendants, seniority integration must be done in a fair and equitable manner.
Why isn’t DOH in a merger included in scope?
The short answer is that a contract between the AFA and US Airways cannot be binding upon a third party. Section 1.D states that the AFA merger policy applies if both Flight Attendant groups are represented by AFA. The AFA Constitution and Bylaws is the controlling document and references DOH.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
US Airways Flight Attendants Again Reject Contract Offer
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11721056/1/us-airways-flight-attendants-again-reject-contract-offer.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11721056/1/us-airways-flight-attendants-again-reject-contract-offer.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
I am so very proud of the courage, tanacity, unity of the flight attendant group with this vote!
YOU DESERVE BETTER!!!! NO MORE MEDIATORS!!! YOUR IN SEC. 6.
They want a merger with AA, make them pay for it. YOUR CONTRACT OF CHOICE FIRST!!!
ITS TIME!
FlyGuyBWI
Advanced
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2003
- Messages
- 237
- Reaction score
- 13
I see Negotiations being "parked" by the NMB. A release into a cooling-off period is not likely before the election
N965VJ
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2005
- Messages
- 3,255
- Reaction score
- 149
Doing the same thing over again, and expecting different results. 😛
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
You guys need to let the mediator go. They can't force a mediator on the f light attendant group. Mediators job is to facilitate the two parties into an agreement. His job is done.
Let him go.
Your in sec. 6.
Options:
Informational picketing
Back to the neg. table to rework items that will facilitate passing a T/A
Strike
Onestep2flt
Senior
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2007
- Messages
- 386
- Reaction score
- 155
While I can agree that is what should happen, AFA says that negotiations will remain under the national mediation board control. The therory with the AA merger is they agreed to binding arbitration. I have no clue if that is true or even legal for one party to agree and one not. I assume the way around that is the representational election that would take place. Assuming that AFA gets kicked to the curb I guess this is how it would all work out for the management team. I have no clue. What are the legalties in this situation? I think a lot of folks would like to know what the true steps are. For instance, If AFA is booted I assume contract goes with it. Is that correct? If that is the case it would not matter much about scope or anything else in that document. The only true benefit would be that you would have a couple dollars more per hour for the time being until you know the outcome of any proposed merger. These are the things that AFA has trouble with. They can't seem to connect with the members in any meaningful way to give them all the info needed. Instead they remained pretty silent for the last eight years now.
I have not posted here in a long time. One reason is not many true open minded posters are left here. Just looking at the last few pages it has been folks that call their fellow workers names because they disagree with the conclusions they reached regarding the TA. Saying over and over again that everyone that voted no either did not read it or the Facebook conspiracy theory clouded everyone's judgement.
I hope nothing but the best for all of you. It does take courage to do what you did. The numbers were a lot closer this time, so perhaps you are on the right path. It will not be easy from here, but it is not hopeless either. Keep hounding your AFA reps for more open communication. Keep asking them questions and don't give up
BungeeJumper
Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Messages
- 56
- Reaction score
- 46
I'm hearing reports from the Phoenix crew room of flight attendants in tears. People are devastated there. I'm seeing posts on facebook saying "Some people just don't understand how badly so many of us need this" and another saying "To the 51% of you I say go to hell. We have f/a's barely making it that this would have been life changing for". Too many to share them all.
I don't feel pride, I feel sorry for them. It's a sad day for many of these flight attendants, who had such hope that their lives would change for the better with this TA.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
Since our society adopted "democracy"...majority is the rule of order.
the T/A reallly didn't change much, they just shuffled around some numbers from one area to another. Most know this, those that changed their vote to "yes" were worried about a merger with AA as it was crammed down in the TA as every other sentence.
.
If you dont' do this, a possible merger will do this, and if you don't take that, this will possibly happen..leaving the speculating door open to "fear mongering".
Tell in the f/as that a federal mediator, brought in by the unions to help facilitate negotiations, would not release them, nor would he make any additonal time for negotiations if the T/A didn't pass... huh??? What?????
Since when does a hired mediator dictate to the union what he will or won't do.
I say...YOUR FIRED!!!!!
Next.....
option 1: Back to the table to renegotiate
option 2: Informational picketing included
option 3: take a strike vote...30 day cooling off...STRIKE!!!
If a company cannot afford to pay livable wages to its employees; they don't deserve to be in existence!!!!!!! (quote by Teddy Xidas, LaborNet, March 2003
Who does AFA think they are the IAM? "Vote till you get it right" !!!
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
Seriously, Phoenix crews need to get over it already. They have been sitting under rose colored glasses for too long.
This failed by majority. There is always room for more neogtiations; don't let anyone tell you differently.
US Airways is NOT in Bankruptcy folks!!!!!! Get it yet!!!! Get the gorrilla off your backs!
If they don't want to deal, you have the right to call for a strike! When we were in BK, we called for a strike vote for pete's sake.
The International AFA needs to stop lying to the members and tell them the truth. You have options.
The company needs YOU more than you need them. They want AA, and they need the f/as to ACCEPT the T/A so Douggie looks good to the DOT, public and AA creditors.
Do your homework, know your strength and power in unity...stick to your guns, don't back down.
USAirways got Pref bid, scope, "me too, for absolutely nothing. You waited 10 years for a $40 million $$ contract????? over 5 years. US Airways f/as gave hundreds and hundreds, and hundreds of millions of $$$ in the past 10 years. To get back 8 million a year is a joke.
And the AFA never told the members how much cost savings the company got for pref bid, scope, and "me to" and separating from the pilots.
