Immediate termination

[PITbull]

C'mon bear,

U has had 7 bases close just from mergers alone the past 10 years and in addition, 3 displacements between 2004 through 2006.

You know better. Company didn't pay for the moving for the first 2 displacements because the VF program sideletter had that if a f/a was saved by a voluntary furlough, the company would not pay for a displacement of that f/a.

On reduced wages, f/as can no longer afford to move...just to save a substandard wage job. No one can aford to be treated like a yo-yo.

 

[kid5mule]

C'mon bear,

U has had 7 bases close just from mergers alone the past 10 years and in addition, 3 displacements between 2004 through 2006.

You know better. Company didn't pay for the moving for the first 2 displacements because the VF program sideletter had that if a f/a was saved by a voluntary furlough, the company would not pay for a displacement of that f/a.

On reduced wages, f/as can no longer afford to move...just to save a substandard wage job. No one can aford to be treated like a yo-yo.

 

[ab320driver]

Please. Enough of that sob story.

No tears or pity needed. Just explaining why the language is in the contract, and why it WILL be in the joint contract...

 

[Mtnman928]

sky high states: "Bases"
LAX
SFO
SAN
ORF
SYR
MIA
GSP
BWI...........here's some prior "cities of work". It makes it difficult to run YOUR LIFE when base after base gets closed.

You should add PIT to that list. More and more people are commuting from what they thought was a safe base.

Mtnman

 

[Atlantic]

Live where you want to live. But when you are to be at work,be there. If you have to come in the day before, so be it. This is what raises hell with the reserves. No shows.

 

[JAMAKE1]

On reduced wages, f/as can no longer afford to move...just to save a substandard wage job. No one can aford to be treated like a yo-yo.

Oh please...I love it how some people fail to take responsibility for their own lives. In any other industry, one is expected to be to work and show up on time. If one CHOOSES to be in a sub-standard wage job, one still has to take responsibility for his/her life choices and also accept responsibility for gettting (or not getting) to work on time. The problem with many commuters is that they tend to blame the company they work for, for their life-style choices. It is not the company's problem that an employee CHOOSES to live away from the city where they are based. Pit, I don't and won't accept your response that somehow the F/A is a victim. At the end of the day, it comes down to CHOICE. The only constant in the universe (and especially in this industry) IS change. One either accepts it and adapts to those changes, or otherwise, one needs to re-evaluate and re-assess their life choices (as you have done). When one chooses to put their livelihood in the hands of a major corporation, be it an airline or otherwise, the employee is at the company's mercy as to where that company will need to base its employees...and more often than not, operations bases will change as market conditions change. The individual is still responsible for getting to work...ON TIME. Furthermore, I think it is an "entitlement" mentality to imply or suggest that an airline employee can expect to stay put in the station or base that they were hired in or assigned to at D.O.H. I am pretty sure that the stews hired by PSA in San Diego never dreamt that they'd be stationed outside of California working night-time runs across the Atlantic some 35 years into their flying career. Like the bumper sticker states, "expect the unexpected." Words to live by...

 

[CLTBWIDAYSYR]

I am still confused as to why my supervisor can NOT show up to work due to a snow storm (driving in from suburbia, the roads are just terrible...), yet someone flying in doesn't get that option.

 

[ab320driver]

Like the bumper sticker states, "expect the unexpected." Words to live by...

EXACTLY. That's why the commuter language is in the contract. Having middle managers reducing staffing levels on a whim, only to change them back months later, makes it impossible to plant family roots anywhere. (Just ask the PIT and LAS folks.) This little bit of "protection" is rarely used, but makes "management tweaks" tolerable. I guess we'll agree to disagree on this topic. If you don't like it, get a better contract...

 

[MarkMyWords]

I am still confused as to why my supervisor can NOT show up to work due to a snow storm (driving in from suburbia, the roads are just terrible...), yet someone flying in doesn't get that option.

In my 19 years here, there has only been one occassion where my manager did not make it to work while everyone else was expected to be there. That was when his wife was in labor and he was driving her to a hospital in a snow storm. After the birth if his child, he did make it into the office several hours later. Managers were always expected to be at the office regardless of the circumstances.

But that has been my experience......

 

[Bear96]

C'mon bear,

U has had 7 bases close just from mergers alone the past 10 years and in addition, 3 displacements between 2004 through 2006.

That's nice. And it's the nature of the business. All airlines have a history of opening and closing bases and displacements. Always have, always will. Nothing new here.

By the way, how many times did you get involuntarily displaced out of PIT? Seems like you managed to stay in one place for quite some time.

My point was that I doubt that anyone was involuntarily forced to move due to ALL of the closings and displacements you mention.

You know better. Company didn't pay for the moving for the first 2 displacements because the VF program sideletter had that if a f/a was saved by a voluntary furlough, the company would not pay for a displacement of that f/a.

No, I did not know that. That sucks. Seems like a better sideletter should have been negotiated. But then again, I suppose the VF program actually saved people's jobs. So the real choice was: involuntary furlough, or unpaid move. Given that choice, unpaid move is definitely the preferable one for those that were dying to be F/As.

On reduced wages, f/as can no longer afford to move...just to save a substandard wage job. No one can aford to be treated like a yo-yo.

People seem to do a lot of strange things for this substandard wage job. Guess what? Management knows it, and will take full advantage of it.

If you are in a situation and you feel like you are being treated like a yo-yo and don't like it, take some responsibility for yourself and get out of the situation. As long as airline employees let themselves be treated like crap, airline management will continue to treat them like crap. Yet there is no shortage of people signing up for more.

 

[john john]

Managers were always expected to be at the office regardless of the circumstances.

Key word expected maybe maybe not

 

[N965VJ]

I am still confused as to why my supervisor can NOT show up to work due to a snow storm (driving in from suburbia, the roads are just terrible...), yet someone flying in doesn't get that option.

The difference is that when you are driving, it is ultimately you who has to decide what is safe to travel and what is not. When you are non-reving or riding the jumpseat to get to work that decision gets made for you.

The State of Ohio tried to address this a few years back with a three-level system of snow emergencies. It was abandoned, but Google stills shows it on a few smaller municipal sites that have not been updated.

Here’s what Level II was:

LEVEL II

A LEVEL II SNOW EMERGENCY is for all roads and streets including state, county, and township roads, and all city streets. This means that people with a real and important need to be out on the roads and streets should do so. All persons including news media reporters, support, and production personnel; and all health care and other emergency personnel should contact their employers to determine whether they are to report to work during the snow emergency. All public safety employees must report as scheduled.

Does that mean I don’t have to drive to PIT? I never got to try that scenario out.

 

[PITbull]

Oh please...I love it how some people fail to take responsibility for their own lives. In any other industry, one is expected to be to work and show up on time. If one CHOOSES to be in a sub-standard wage job, one still has to take responsibility for his/her life choices and also accept responsibility for gettting (or not getting) to work on time. The problem with many commuters is that they tend to blame the company they work for, for their life-style choices. It is not the company's problem that an employee CHOOSES to live away from the city where they are based. Pit, I don't and won't accept your response that somehow the F/A is a victim. At the end of the day, it comes down to CHOICE. The only constant in the universe (and especially in this industry) IS change. One either accepts it and adapts to those changes, or otherwise, one needs to re-evaluate and re-assess their life choices (as you have done). When one chooses to put their livelihood in the hands of a major corporation, be it an airline or otherwise, the employee is at the company's mercy as to where that company will need to base its employees...and more often than not, operations bases will change as market conditions change. The individual is still responsible for getting to work...ON TIME. Furthermore, I think it is an "entitlement" mentality to imply or suggest that an airline employee can expect to stay put in the station or base that they were hired in or assigned to at D.O.H. I am pretty sure that the stews hired by PSA in San Diego never dreamt that they'd be stationed outside of California working night-time runs across the Atlantic some 35 years into their flying career. Like the bumper sticker states, "expect the unexpected." Words to live by...

I appreciate that JAMAKE, but that's just one reason why we have union representation in this industry. B) Don'thave to work by the seat of your pants.

 

[PITbull]

By the way, how many times did you get involuntarily displaced out of PIT? Seems like you managed to stay in one place for quite some time.

It was called seniority, and I had plenty of it. But even I could not escape the potential for loss of income in turning into a reserve after 25 years. I knew that if I stayed I would have had to transfer to PHL to hold a line. Not displaced, but adding more time to the job to commute and expense of living in PHL, again on a substantially reduced hourly rate.

No thanks.

But that doesn' mean I don't understand or can't be empathetic to the plight of others who are relegated to the profession because many, after many decades of flying, have no education to pursue something else.

 

[TheWatcher]

Again, bad treatment of employees justify the needs for unions. I would love to find and hire idiots that are qualified to do the job the company requires of them without complaining. Idiots that will move regardless of whatever crap the company throws at them and that have no lives. That would be a dream come true! Atlease it would be for a short term. In my experience, someone that will move willy nilly,constantly after base closing or however you people in the airline world word it, without complaining, on the wishes of the company, is an idiot. That person is not truely long term material and caliber tends to be lower.If US or any company seeks that sort of individual----one without a desire for a higher standard of living and quality of life and improved working conditions better than the rest, i say let it reflect in every single paid position within the company--beginning at the top and moving down the chain. Cut the salaries and benefits to the bone, with the top echelon, the ones that are there the shortest amount of time taking on most of it. I predict attitude will change overnight.