FA TA voted down

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

There WAS scope in the TA that was voted down. Go to OurAFA.org...there's plenty of information about the scope, how it was based on the current east scope, and added additional protections and LPP's.

Your kidding right? Or is F/A your only employment option? Wake UP!

 

[ChockJockey]

Funny how the socialist always have these cute, but idiotic statements.

Too bad you don't understand politics enough to realize that being a flight attendant is about as bourgeois as it gets.

 

[SparrowHawk]

PitCow seems nicer than a bull....Either way Neither has common sense...I find it funny so funny that these same people whine and complain about how bad it is here and NOW we use that its the job market and the economy that prevents them from searching out new employment...Whats the excuse for the last 10 years?? The company offered twice a fair contract that the union agreed was either fair or as far as the company would or could do... The company has a budget plain and simple. If we break the budget we go back to the courts yet again. I for one do not want that! The majority voted down the contract now everyone must live with it. No complaining no whining. They werent happy in the eighties they werent happy in the nineties and now still not happy! Yet they still choose to work for this horrible unfair company.. Poor things...Watch...learn ..listen and see what happens....Whut up wit dat ?

1. Budgets are not etched upon stone tablet never to be altered.
2. Somple concept, No Flight Attendents = No Airline.
3. When you have an advantage you press forward and leverage that advantage to the fullest extent possible. To date this has not been done. The mediator needs to go and a strike vote taken. WHY?? To negotiate the biggest contract enhancements possible.
4. A "fair" contract is one that both side ratify. Since there is no agreement there is currently no fairness.
5. You don't get what is "fair" you get what you negotiate.

This is business kids, not some play by the High School Drama Club. Do you think the word fair ever crosses Doug Parker's lips when talking abot the F/A's??? I don't even think he can spell the word.

 

[BungeeJumper]

Your kidding right? Or is F/A your only employment option? Wake UP!

When someone can't present actual facts, they insult the person posting. I'm awake, I'm not a FA, and I am employed outside of the airline industry.... however, I am someone who can read what the AFA has posted, and/or watch a video (and use proper grammar...when trying to say "you are kidding", one should say "you're kidding" not "your kidding").

 

[ggiby]

Mgt wants the scope language gone in such a great way. I agree.... SCOPE is the most important language in our contract. Its not worth giving up for even $100.00 per hour!

 

[diamondcutter]

US320,

US Airways does not have the right or perogative to provide term sheets to another airline f/a group for their vote and jam that ratification down US Airways f/a throat without their vote or negotiation.

Its unprecedented because its ILLEGAL and the f/as will either STRIKE or take it to court or both!!!!

AND BECAUSE THE SCOPE LANGUAGE IS POOR AT ONLY PROVIDES FOR SOME WAGE SECURITY IF FURLOUGHED DEPENDING ON YEARS OF SERVICE IS ONLY ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE T/A FAILED.

SO, THE F/AS AT US AIRWAYS ARE NOT BEHIND NOR DO THEY SUPPORT A MERGER OF AA IF THEY ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THAT MERGER.

What planet are you on.

You are not even working so shut up about a strike vote. You cannot sign up for CHOAS . Hell Afa tried to start a fund for and it was a no go. Any no voters care to sign up for chaos ......crickets. Stop it with the strike BS. Worrie about where you work and stay out of ours . We the FA's here do not need nor want your help.

 

[ContUNITEus]

1. Budgets are not etched upon stone tablet never to be altered.
2. Somple concept, No Flight Attendents = No Airline.
3. When you have an advantage you press forward and leverage that advantage to the fullest extent possible. To date this has not been done. The mediator needs to go and a strike vote taken. WHY?? To negotiate the biggest contract enhancements possible.
4. A "fair" contract is one that both side ratify. Since there is no agreement there is currently no fairness.
5. You don't get what is "fair" you get what you negotiate.

This is business kids, not some play by the High School Drama Club. Do you think the word fair ever crosses Doug Parker's lips when talking abot the F/A's??? I don't even think he can spell the word.

"

I agree with you. I interpret that this vote came close to passing because of pity and acquiescence. I understand that there are a lot of flight attendants that gave the "(I-feel-sorry-for-you) vote, so I will vote yes to just finish this thing." And all he ones who abstained from voting should have voted no - not voting is sort of cowardly to me, and it is done just so to please someone else.

Trust me, I understand perfectly where you are. I have settled in the past with a corporation for 'the-less' - just as to move on, and/or not appear too greedy, or to bury the past. IT IS NEVER WORTH SETTLING FOR LESS. The short term solution is never good. Being good, never pays.

When you put yourself exactly in the same tough stance as the other party that you are negotiating with, you come out better in the end. The fact that half the F/As voted just as the union negotiators did, which was to show appeasement, shows lack of discipline and lack of strength and courage to up-gauge the game.

I hope that all those who voted YES to the contract, just to be let down, understand that negotiating tactics have to be ruthless sometimes in order to get the maximum benefit at the end.

I trust that you will eventually appreciate the final passing vote, and that you will understand that this whole 'voting down the TA twice' was worth while.

 

[PITbull]

PITBull,

Here are the facts:

1. If an AMR-US Airways merger in principal is announced the US Airways-APFA Term Sheet requires APFA to seek single carrier class status as soon as possible after the POR's confirmation by Judge Lane.

2. NMB rules state that in a merger if one union has 65% of the combined union members and non members the larger union can be designated the union for the combined group without a vote. What's unclear is will US Airways' F/As be considered one or two groups since they continue to have separate MECs and contracts.

at risk.

You are wrong.

There are two unions representing the respective f/as groups you are referring to....there are no f/as that are non-union as you quote above, therefore, a vote for representation by one of the unions will have to take place first.

Again, as I mentioned before, you tend to misread and jumble the information. I don't know if you do this on purpose, or you just don't undersand fully the information or facts as you call them.

the rest of your post is just not worth a response.

 

[PITbull]

You are not even working so shut up about a strike vote. You cannot sign up for CHOAS . Hell Afa tried to start a fund for and it was a no go. Any no voters care to sign up for chaos ......crickets. Stop it with the strike BS. Worrie about where you work and stay out of ours . We the FA's here do not need nor want your help.

YOU are wrong, too!

There is a "strike fund". It was an agenda item I WROTE, AND OTHER DELEGATES SUPPORTED, brought forward to the delegates at the 2002 AFA Annual Board Meeting.

IT PASSED, AND A FUND WAS STARTED AT THAT MEETING!

Boo, hoo, hoo, I just hate that for you!

 

[SparrowHawk]

Why on God's green earth would a major union like AFA not have a strike fund? IMO the US AFA locals should be setting up their own strike funds and working with food banks and the like in a VERY public way (Nogotiating tactic if nothing else)

Frankly US Airways or any airline can not survive not flying for more than a week or two before the damage is irreversable, you know it and they know it. It's called leverage, you have it, they don't USE IT for krissakes. Do you not realize that I've been flying regularly since 200 and your wages have not only not gone up they've shruck dramitically due to inflation and concerssions. Do you need a baseball bat upside your head to notice this?

Again, you're in the best position you've been in for years yo hammer them. They need labor peace in order to have a shot at a deal with AMR. YOU as F/A's need a PIECE of the pie. A larger piece with ince cream. Here's your slogan, A bigger piece means labor peace.

 

[PITbull]

No, the contract would have increased the FA costs by $40 million per year, not by $40 million over five years.

No, the contract would have increased the FA costs by $40 million per year, not by $40 million over five years.

You're wrong, too.
It's a $40 million contract expense for the company, for the f/a group over the life of the contract. Translating to approx. 8Million per year, equates to approx $1455.00 per f/a per year.

Over 5 years equates to Approx $7,275.00 per f/a.
However, if you take into account medical premiums and co-pays and deductables... some f/as have coverage for just themselves, or for a depedent, or spouse, or for a family...this could be huge and can't be calculated in the "whole". F
or some f/as who don't use health care over 5 years, they have around 7,000 over the 5 years. If you take into account f/as who utilize health care often, and their families, this increase over the next 5 years is miniscule.

One long-term illness any time over this 5-year period, could exhaust employee/employer health care, and it would fall under COBRA...with the employee bearing the full cost. Ther are no protections in the contract for this event. The population is getting older, and therefore the probability increases that this could happen.

In previous contracts, f/as had protection against this, so there contracts had more value.

Today, those protections are gone, and the f/as is at risk not only to lose any increase benefit in this contract, but to continue to slide backwards.

 

[ggiby]

PTBull,

One more point...I find your insults while behind a keyboard illuminating. Here's the bottom line. If US Airways & AMR merge the F/As are nor guaranteed DOH, the F/A SLI will be governed by McCaskill-Bond, and a key area in previous pilot SLIs has been a contract economic comparison to help determine career expectation.

With a ratified TA US Airways' F/As would have been on par with APFA's F/As for the potential seniority integration. Now like US Airways' pilots, by not ratifying the MOU TA due to the BPR's bonehead move under the RC5s threat of "roll call", both US Airways' pilots and F/As have a far inferior contract to compare if the current agreements are used for an economic comparison by the two merger committees in front of the Board of Arbitration.

Do I like this? No, of course not. But, what's even sadder is that the vast majority of F/As don't even understand the serious SLI risk; not to mention the continuing loss of the time value of money because they did not attend a roadshow or even read the TA.

 

[ggiby]

Many need to educate themselves with the McCaskill-Bond previsions.... but those who did not read the t/a 2..... do not know what this is.... they also do not know what scope is.... ??? IMHO.... Right now we need to focus on a joint contract with US and AW..... once that is done we will move on and focus on the AA/ US thing which will be so much more complicated.... then we need to look at the McCaskill bond thing.... IMHO

 

[FWAAA]

You're wrong, too.
It's a $40 million contract expense for the company, for the f/a group over the life of the contract. Translating to approx. 8Million per year, equates to approx $1455.00 per f/a per year.

The tentative agreement would have brought a single contract following a 2005 merger between US Airways and America West, whose flight attendants (and pilots) still work under separate contracts. Both groups would have received substantial raises and job protections in the US Airways contract would have been retained and extended to America West. The airline has indicated its flight attendant costs would have increased by about $40 million annually.

http://www.thestreet...?cm_ven=GOOGLEN

Despite being wrong, you continue to peddle falsehoods. US management said that the TA would have increased its flight attendant costs by $40 million annually. Yet for some inexplicable reason, you continue to insist otherwise. Perhaps it's a reading comprehension deficit.

The proposed deal rejected by members included immediate 13% pay raises for the pre-merger US Airways attendants and 25% raises for America West cabin crew. A union spokeswoman said the agreement's "job protection language is the best in the industry."

http://online.wsj.co...1664361722.html

A 13% hourly payraise for East and a 25% hourly payraise for West and yet you continue to incorrectly insist that the annual cost increase is instead a life of the contract increase. Perhaps it's the schools.

Is the TA over-all concessionary from the current East Contract, and at the same time a “wind-fall” for the West?
No. This Tentative Agreement increases the Company’s labor costs over both East and West contracts. East Flight Attendants at the top of the pays scale will see a date of signing increase of 13.5%. Although we obviously deserve more, this far exceeds pay increases on date of signing for the last thirty years. West Flight Attendants are underpaid and need to be brought up to the industry average. This contract accomplishes that. As part of this TA, West Flight Attendants will take painful cuts in vacation and insurance. However, both East and West will have a net economic benefit.

http://ourafa.org/q-a/

The TA provided an immediate payraise of $5.64/hr for the East. At 1,000 hours per year, that equals almost $6,000. The West FAs stood to gain far more. And yet you continue to insist that everyone else is wrong and that you are right.

You are wrong.

Over 5 years equates to Approx $7,275.00 per f/a.
However, if you take into account medical premiums and co-pays and deductables... some f/as have coverage for just themselves, or for a depedent, or spouse, or for a family...this could be huge and can't be calculated in the "whole". F
or some f/as who don't use health care over 5 years, they have around 7,000 over the 5 years. If you take into account f/as who utilize health care often, and their families, this increase over the next 5 years is miniscule.

Yes, everyone in the country is being asked to shoulder a bigger portion of their heath care costs. Nevertheless, your math is faulty. The failed TA would have increased the company's expense by an estimated $40 million per year, not the $8 million per year you ignorantly insist.

It's no skin off my nose that the FAs rejected this TA, but misinformation like you're peddling must be corrected.

 

[diamondcutter]

YOU are wrong, too!

There is a "strike fund". It was an agenda item I WROTE, AND OTHER DELEGATES SUPPORTED, brought forward to the delegates at the 2002 AFA Annual Board Meeting.

IT PASSED, AND A FUND WAS STARTED AT THAT MEETING!

Boo, hoo, hoo, I just hate that for you!

Boo hoo hoo what are you a 4 yr old . What you did in that past miss self important is past . Where and how much money is in it? not enough to fund FA's paychecks. Again quit with the strike BS. You are of no help , just like SU email to the FA's. unless your goining to fund it stay the hell out of it. Your old news move on. We still earn a living here you chose to leave !!! . CC days as clt Lecp are numbered and this will help our members . You are of no help here.