Flight Attendants' Voices Heard: Hell No!

[Bertha]

This TA was an insult to a workforce who agreed over seven years ago to virtually gut their contract for the good of the company with the understanding that we would be rewarded for our sacrifices once the company became financially stable. We took pay cuts, vacation cuts and gave up many work rule protections. And what were we rewarded with over 7 years later? A TA that offered me less money than I would have been making in 2004! Not only that. Flight attendants with 26 years seniority got zero vacation days returned to them. Mind you,7 years ago those same flight attendants gave up 9 vacation days . The fact that this management has no respect for it's employees is understood by the entire workforce. Seven years is a long time to work under a concessionary contract. A lot happens in seven years, babies are born,children start college, illnesses occur, on the job injuries happen, Mortgages are foreclosed on, Life happens! Yet this management could care less. As long as they can continue to squeeze this airline dry so that they can continue to buy their beach and ski houses that is all that matters to them. We have a member of this management team who has shown his disrespect for the law. Can we really expect him to respect us? Finally, the scope clause was rewritten in this TA and the new language was unacceptable to the membership. The management of this airline has merger fever and a strongly worded scope clause which has all it's t's crossed and all it's i's dotted is a must. It doesn't matter what the pilots scope clause says because flight attendants are not pilots. We have a separate contract with different rules and different pay scales. What ever happens from here on,I am so proud of my coworkers for refusing to sell ourselves cheap. We deserve to be rewarded for our dedication and our professionalism and to be recognized as more than just an overhead item. We are not electricity or fuel, we are people.mothers,fathers,homeowners,just like Doug Parker and we have been a part of this airline much longer than he has. We deserve and demand respect.

 

[Beancounter]

I'm hearing some different things here. Do I understand correctly that this was basically a cost neutral contract offer? They offered more hourly pay, but took away benefits?

 

[usfliboi]

Smiling?

I doubt that, you said this would pass by a landslide, how could you be so wrong?

I bet your cowering with fear now.

I cant sleep or eat lol ! We have been here so many times before and in two cases it brought us to Filing Chapter 11! I dont want to happen to our group what happen to yours. If the company does "sweeten" the offer it will be because it can afford it. If not they wont! This situatiion is why unions are becoming irrelevent these days in the working world. All one can do is hope for the best. In the mean time....Im under my bed cowering with fear !

 

[Phoenix]

Your confusion stems from an assumption that I want to make a decision for the FAs. I never said I wanted that power or control over anyone else's life. Way back when I first posted on this thread it was in response to SH seeking my opinion, or so his reference to "Callaway Gold" would imply. So I offered my opinion and here we are. The bottom line for me is I would like to see a ratified FA and Pilot contract, but not if those contracts mean the company will be forced into a weakened financial position which means more lost jobs and/or a trip into bankruptcy court. Making fun of the collective bargaining process and baseless entitlement midsets is something I throw in just for folks like you.

Glad to see you are concerned about Doug collecting his beer money. While you are hanging out with Doug and the boys singing bar songs at the Irish pub, can you offer a toast to the FAs... just one toast.. just one?

 

[ggiby]

I'm hearing some different things here. Do I understand correctly that this was basically a cost neutral contract offer? They offered more hourly pay, but took away benefits?

They took many benefits.....I guess they figured we would like the money more.... But I guess they forgot that benefits cost money too... like Health Insurance.... also lost sick leave accrual.... Lost vacation accrual.... Dose that answer your question?

 

[Bertha]

Good luck getting a new TA anytime soon. I hope this isn't a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Really interested in what was so bad about that contract. I read through it and thought it had some really good work rules. Would really be interested to hear some specific items that caused the no vote and what (realistic) changes would have resulted in a yes vote.

If you read post # 136 on page 17 you will see some of the specifics.

 

[BungeeJumper]

If you read post # 136 on page 17 you will see some of the specifics.

Thanks, Bertha, for sharing that insight. To summarize, the majority (if not all) of items lost in the 2004 bankruptcy contract were not returned in the TA. Some people lost 9 vacation days, and everyone lost pay, in 2004. The TA felt offensive because there was no effort to return even a portion of those items (except a small pay increase). I was wondering if you would share some of the work rules that were lost in 2004 that would need to be in a TA. I'm assuming people aren't expecting everything to be returned (although that would be ideal, it's probably not realistic) and since we're starting from the current contract, how many more vacation days and what % of pay increase would make the TA palatable? The union is going to be asking members why they voted no. I really hope people are specific and realistic about what is needed for the new Joint Negotiating Committee to present to the company, so the National Mediation Board will allow talks to resume instead of ordering a recess. Wishing you all the best, and appreciating your taking the time to educate us.

 

[Bertha]

One thing we are overlooking with the resounding No vote that f/as cast last Friday is just how out of touch their own union is with the membership. The fact that they thought this garbage deserved to be put up for a vote is astounding. It has to make you wonder if there was another agenda at play here. And the fact that our union dues are about to go up just added insult to injury. I submit that it may be time to go union shopping or at the very least remove the entire negotiating committee. Their finger prints are all over this TA,not just Mike Flores. And people who haven't worked as a flight attendant for years (like Carol Austin) should not be deciding our future. She needs to go back on the line and experience the fruits of her labor from the last concessionary contract she helped deliver to the membership. Enough is enough. Finally,kudos to the president of Charlotte's LEC for coming out against this TA. Unfortunately the presidents of Washington and Philidelphia did not have the guts to tell their members how they felt. I would have had more respect for them if they had said they were for it rather than the sit on the fence posture that they took throughout the entire period leading up to last Friday. We need to do some serious house cleaning and we need to do it before the next round of negotiations,whenever they take place.

 

[Bertha]

Thanks, Bertha, for sharing that insight. To summarize, the majority (if not all) of items lost in the 2004 bankruptcy contract were not returned in the TA. Some people lost 9 vacation days, and everyone lost pay, in 2004. The TA felt offensive because there was no effort to return even a portion of those items (except a small pay increase). I was wondering if you would share some of the work rules that were lost in 2004 that would need to be in a TA. I'm assuming people aren't expecting everything to be returned (although that would be ideal, it's probably not realistic) and since we're starting from the current contract, how many more vacation days and what % of pay increase would make the TA palatable? The union is going to be asking members why they voted no. I really hope people are specific and realistic about what is needed for the new Joint Negotiating Committee to present to the company, so the National Mediation Board will allow talks to resume instead of ordering a recess. Wishing you all the best, and appreciating your taking the time to educate us.

With all do respect,I would not tell you what flight attendants would agree to even if I knew specifics. I am not negotiating for the flight attendants on an Internet open forum. The union already knows the answers to some of the questions you posed just from the feedback they got at their roadshows. I find it very interesting that you seem to be delving for specifics. If I were a betting person,I would bet that you are a member of US Airways management's team and that the last thing this company wants is to do is put these negotiations on a back burner. If this is true, than the best advice I can give you is that when you go back to the table, remember that yes,you are representing the company,but the union is representing real people,people who are suffering,some are fighting cancer,some are home recuperating from serious injuries due to turbulence, some are holding on to their homes by the skin of their teeth,the stories are endless. Everything in our lives costs more than it did seven years ago. And that is the reason why I am so proud of my fellow flight attendants for standing strong last week. They had the courage to tell Doug Parker that he may not respect us,but we are law biding citizens who respect ourselves. I would rather work side by side with my coworkers saddled with this back breaking seven year old contract than work side by side with Doug Parker making a six figure salary. I am very careful about the company I keep. Enjoy your day.

 

[Beancounter]

They took many benefits.....I guess they figured we would like the money more.... But I guess they forgot that benefits cost money too... like Health Insurance.... also lost sick leave accrual.... Lost vacation accrual.... Dose that answer your question?

Thanks.

Believe me, they didn't forget that benefits cost money. At first I was hearing that the company had offered the flight attendants more money, then I started to hear about cuts in other areas, which means less money. If it was just a cost neutral contract locked in for 5 years, good for the flight attendants for turning it down.
The company can't afford to pay for big raises, but a cost neutral contract considering all the F/As have been through is kind of a slap in the face.

Bean

 

[SparrowHawk]

The company can't afford to pay for big raises, but a cost neutral contract considering all the F/As have been through is kind of a slap in the face.

Bean

WOW! You are the absolute Master of Understatement!! Slap in the face? How about a slap in the face, a punch in the gut and a kick in the ass? Doug Parker just got told "Yo, don't pee on my sneakers and say oh look it's raining"

 

[Iclubbabyseals]

WOW! You are the absolute Master of Understatement!! Slap in the face? How about a slap in the face, a punch in the gut and a kick in the ass? Doug Parker just got told "Yo, don't pee on my sneakers and say oh look it's raining"

Well said, sir. Too many whack-os on the west, and a few on the east, who have no idea what negotiating is about.

 

[flyus2]

You might be surprised at what they might do. I know some folks who have left voluntarily or otherwise and have gone on to some pretty nice gigs in the non aviation field. One pilot is flying cargo all over the world for Atlas (i think) and loving it. More than a few F/A's have gone into Sales and are making double what they made at US and home every night. Also you do realize that someone working 3 or 4 nights a week at a good restaurant can easily out perform a reserve F/A at US income wise?

Look I hear what you're saying. Truth is for what you make I wouldn't put on the uniform for a week much less a career. The amount of work versus the reward just isn't there for me. There is a world out there far more lucrative then US Airways.

People like you who are articulate enough to do far more don't and in some ways I wish US would close so you could find out just how much you can make for yourself. It's scary I'll give you that, but it can be very rewarding.

Thank you for your response. I do something other than being a flight attendant and make good money at it. My point was to respond to someone who believes we should just close down the airline. I wanted him to know that there are a lot of people on the property that count on their jobs, not just the labor groups, but the hardworking clerks etc. who don't make any money at all working here, but it's better than no job for them.

 

[Iclubbabyseals]

Thanks.

Believe me, they didn't forget that benefits cost money. At first I was hearing that the company had offered the flight attendants more money, then I started to hear about cuts in other areas, which means less money. If it was just a cost neutral contract locked in for 5 years, good for the flight attendants for turning it down.
The company can't afford to pay for big raises, but a cost neutral contract considering all the F/As have been through is kind of a slap in the face.

Bean

Company is not able to show a loss, their profits are apparently out of control on the plus side, so, why do any of the flight attendants (much less any employee group) think "cost neutral" is a viable foundation for a contract?

 

[BungeeJumper]

If I were a betting person,I would bet that you are a member of US Airways management's team

I'm sorry, Bertha, but you'd lose that bet...but certainly understand from where you're coming and the concerns. I'm not in the airline industry anymore, but I still take an interest in what's happening. I fly US quite often and was honestly surprised by the No vote. Asking for specifics was my way of trying to understand why refusing a contract that appeared (to me) to be better than the current situation, was better than accepting it. The 'bird in the hand is worth two in the bush' saying was the first thing that came to mind. In any case, I hope the FA's get this resolved soon. Best wishes.