Flight attendant overages

[IORFA]

I think your giving them more credit than they deserve. Don't be surprised if 10 seats on the 73's vAAnish.

If they do, then fine. We are back to the point that they will then have to get rid of their precious CM speakers in LAX-I. As Jim said, they can rehire them as translators, but they could have done that before. Apparently, they didn't think that was a good idea. Why, I have no idea. They do it now with the Haiti flights and they did it before with the Moscow flights. Now they have more speakers on LAX-PVG than they did with Moscow and Haiti, so maybe that is what they really wanted.

 

[jason77]

I hope you are right. Would hate to see anyone forlough. But how long can AA go with
this overage. Even before the 3% reduction in flying the company has been offering
monthly leaves. So it is obvious that there is an overage. Wether they choose to
forlough or not remains to be seen.

 

[jason77]

What you people never talk about is the attrition numbers.American has been averaging 45 to 50 people leaving for the last three years.With those numbers it wont take long to eat into the overage we have.

 

[737823]

I'll add to what Jim and others have said. The 737 is the only AC where this would be even remotely feasible. The company elected to put 160 seats in the new ones and is busy converting the older ones to the newer configuration. They must have done their homework and if keeping the minimum FA staffing at three had been cost effective they certainly would have done so. A couple of years ago the company started putting 4 FAs on all 737s including those with the old configuration of 144 seats in order to avoid scheduling difficulties if a 4 FA airplane should show up in a layover city where a 3 FA airplane had left a crew the previous day. This tells me we're simply not that expensive, no matter how much huffing and puffing they do at contract time.

MK

I don't think the marginal cost of a fourth flight attendant on a 737-800 is the issue with costs. Rather, the structural costs of AA FAs due to work rules, lower productivity, and fringe benefits makes your work group uncompetitive. I remember circa-2002-2007 DL reduced the seats on their 737-800s to exactly 150 seats-and even had a completely empty row and one row of two seats in the far back.

Josh

 

[kirkpatrick]

Rather, the structural costs of AA FAs due to work rules, lower productivity, and fringe benefits makes your work group uncompetitive.

I'm not saying they can't do it, I'm saying they won't do it. Remember, the decision to go with 160 seats in the new deliveries and to convert the older planes was just made recently. They wouldn't go to the trouble of moving lavs and galley storage for 12 seats if they didn't think the extra seats would more than make up the cost of the extra FA. And we will get a new contract which will improve productivity. It'll happen when they decide to let it happen, which will be just before the time they want to hire new FAs off the street. They really, really want to dump the DBP and go to a 401k, which is actually a better deal for everyone.

Let me edit to add a few notes on the overage. The number is about 500. The union and company have agreed to offer OVLs (contractual Overage Leaves which must be offered to offset an announced furlough) even though no furlough has been announced. OVLs are a better deal because there is no loss of seniority after 180 days as there is with the PLOAs (Personal Leave Of Absence). It's only a 90 day period, and there's a lot of pent up demand out there for leaves. I don't think they'll have any trouble getting that number, and even if they come up a bit short, I think they'll work with a small overage by offering bid leaves, mini-leaves, PVDs and green lights.

MK

 

[jimntx]

What you people never talk about is the attrition numbers.American has been averaging 45 to 50 people leaving for the last three years.With those numbers it wont take long to eat into the overage we have.

Well, yes and no. The attrition due to retirements tends to concentrate in International. With the exception of IMA, there haven't been that many "big" proffers. As the International people retire they haven't been "replaced"--which suggests that International has been carrying an overage. Reducing the International corps by 100 doesn't necessarily mean that a Domestic overage of 100 has been "taken care of."

Also, total attrition (quit, died, retired, and got fired) for last year, according to the Flight Service website, was 591 flight attendants. So far, for this year through October the total is 501. How many furloughees have been recalled in the past year? This is not "eating into the overage."

Also, remember that the way Flight Service counts attrition doesn't necessarily mean permanent separation from the company. If someone is fired this month and leaves the payroll, that ups this month's (and the year's) attrition by one. If the person gets their job back in arbitration next month, they do not reduce the annual attrition by one. And, as several of the former TW flight attendants have pointed out, the company also counts furloughs as attrition because the person leaves the payroll. However, they really shouldn't be counted as attrition until their 5 years is up because they could be recalled to the payroll at any time.

 

[jason77]

Well, yes and no. The attrition due to retirements tends to concentrate in International. With the exception of IMA, there haven't been that many "big" proffers. As the International people retire they haven't been "replaced"--which suggests that International has been carrying an overage. Reducing the International corps by 100 doesn't necessarily mean that a Domestic overage of 100 has been "taken care of."

Also, total attrition (quit, died, retired, and got fired) for last year, according to the Flight Service website, was 591 flight attendants. So far, for this year through October the total is 501. How many furloughees have been recalled in the past year? This is not "eating into the overage."

Also, remember that the way Flight Service counts attrition doesn't necessarily mean permanent separation from the company. If someone is fired this month and leaves the payroll, that ups this month's (and the year's) attrition by one. If the person gets their job back in arbitration next month, they do not reduce the annual attrition by one. And, as several of the former TW flight attendants have pointed out, the company also counts furloughs as attrition because the person leaves the payroll. However, they really shouldn't be counted as attrition until their 5 years is up because they could be recalled to the payroll at any time.

Its true that it doesnt help american if all the retires are international.But when we start talking about furloughing they come right from the bottom no matter what base has an overage.Also american only recalled fa because we had attrition. Last year at this time we were short.What I was trying to say that if lose another 250 fa in the next six months that will eat into the overage.