The New York
Times article is
here. It is in the Times, but I didn't see New York state mentioned as a participant in the program. It said that 17 states participate, but the only states I saw mentioned by name were Washington (state), Connecticut and Massachusetts.
A quote from the article: "Under the program, known as work-sharing, employers reduce their workers’ weekly hours and pay, often by 20 or 40 percent, and then
states make up some of the lost wages, usually half, from their unemployment funds." (bolding mine)
The article does not say that the unemployment makes up the other half of the employee's wages. It says that the unemployment makes half the
lost wages. So, if the company cut your hours by 50% (I suppose partnership flying might squeak by as a qualifier), the program would cover up to half, or 25% of base pay.
However, AA is not cutting employee hours across the board which is what the article seems to be talking about. It is cutting employee jobs in toto and for only a small (compared to the total f/a workforce) part of those jobs.
But even if New York does participate and our partnership flying would qualify as an example of a company "forced" to cut employee hours, furloughs are still in seniority order; so, do you think there will be many LGA and BOS f/as take a 25% cut in pay to save a DFW, SLT, or LAX f/a's job? I hope so.
One other thing...I can't imagine AMR not disputing every single UI claim that they might get denied. Also, just a side note...I worked for the Texas state employment service for 7 years. It is a violation of state and Federal law to misrepresent your employment status when filing a claim for unemployment compensation. You have to sign a statement that you lost your employment through no fault of your own. Volunteering to fly part-time or take an overage leave is not "no fault of your own." And, you must be willing and able and actively seeking full-time employment. Drawing UI to stay home with the children does not fit that requirement. I don't care to hear about how your next door neighbor's best friend's hairdresser's cousin drew unemployment while working. There is anecdotal data on fraud cases that have slipped through. Unless things have changed a lot, there is jail time if you get caught.
There's also the issue of trying to explain to a government bureaucrat who sees full-time work as 40 hours/week at a desk that a 70-hour guarantee is not already part-time work.
When I was furloughed last time, I registered on-line (we have a pretty good system here in Texas), but I did get called in to the nearest office for an interview regarding the loss of my "part-time" job. Then after it was established that I did have a full-time job, the interviewer wanted to know if I needed the forms for filing a claim against AMR for violation of the Taft-Hartley Wage and Hour Act for not being paid for all the hours I worked--hour before departure, etc. Then I had to give the interviewer the short course in the RLA. It was a new employee so I wasn't too surprised. I remember when I was hired with the agency. I was given a one-day training class on policy and procedures (mostly the things I could get fired for, such as coming back late from lunch) and assigned a desk and a case load of unemployed workers that I was supposed to help find jobs.
Update: Went back to the article and found the sentence that will stop AMR from participating...
"Most states require employers to continue providing full-time benefits, like health coverage, to employees on reduced hours." If this would cost AMR a dime, you know they would say we don't qualify for the program.
