kirkpatrick
Veteran
A slight improvement in the attrition numbers for September. 60 active FA's left for whatever reason, and 27 more TWAers took retirement from furlough status.
MK
MK
September FA Attrition
- Thread starter kirkpatrick
- Start date
Just wondering if their is an attrition list for twu workers? We are kept in the dark about that stuff.
jimntx
Veteran
It will be interesting to see the average seniority when it is posted later this month. I know that at St. Louis, we had 5 quit 01SEP--all were in the 6-12 year range.
I heard last night that someone junior to me at St. Louis is resigning this month. I must put a stop to this. Currently, I am the 19th most junior person in the base. NO ONE, repeat, NO ONE junior to me is allowed to quit, die, retire, or get fired!
JimIt will be interesting to see the average seniority when it is posted later this month. I know that at St. Louis, we had 5 quit 01SEP--all were in the 6-12 year range.
I heard last night that someone junior to me at St. Louis is resigning this month. I must put a stop to this. Currently, I am the 19th most junior person in the base. NO ONE, repeat, NO ONE junior to me is allowed to quit, die, retire, or get fired!
It's happening at LGA also...Juniors are quitting left and right..I know of 4 alone who resigned last month.
jimntx
Veteran
They are building schedules these days to "maximize" f/a usage--doesn't seem to eliminate airport appreciation sits of 2-3 hours--to avoid a recall. Not because of the former TWA flight attendants (the company knows that there is a contract and if they recall it must be done in seniority order). They are trying to avoid a recall because we are overstaffed on flight attendants.
Now, before LGA, SLT, BOS, or DCA f/as jump down my throat...
Those bases are understaffed. MIA, DFW, ORD, and LAX are all overstaffed substantially. Well you might ask, why don't they transfer flying to those bases? They would love to; however, if you look at the base roster vs. the flying currently assigned to the base, those bases are overstaffed. If you look at the flying assigned to the base vs. the number of f/as actually willing to get on airplanes that have passengers on them, they are understaffed.
The problem with the schedules they are building is that they have caused the Law of Unintended Consequences to kick in. The sequences are such that it is almost impossible for a commuter to back up trips--particularly junior commuters. The sequences sign in early and get back late.
The juniors have to fly high time 3 months in order to afford reserve month. If they can not fly high time, they can not afford to do this job. Therefore they are looking elsewhere. But, it's not just the juniors.
I had a 19 year flight attendant tell me last night that unless the scheduling system improves, she is going to have to quit. She is having major child care problems with this 2 on-2 off business. She also is a commuter to St. Louis.
The powers that be don't seem to be able to see beyond the ends of their noses. In a base where 80% of the flight attendants are commuters, they are putting turn lines on the bid sheet that are 1 on-2 off, and the turn is not commutable on either end. So, you fly on Monday, commute home early Tuesday morning, commute back to STL on Wednesday evening, fly Thursday, etc. And, the lines are not attractive enough for St. Louis resident f/as to bid them.
But, I repeat...NO ONE junior to me is permitted to leave. Pass it on.
jimntx
Veteran
Just FYI, I came in from a trip today and there was an HI6 stating that bid leaves would be available for November in most bases. That could only mean that we are still overstaffed from a systemwide standpoint.
Funny how we can be overstaffed. I am on my second reassignment from this "so called" turn.
Looks like you are correct. Lots of leaves for IMA this month and next as well. Reserves getting their hours but not max out.
jimntx
Veteran
Brace, brace, brace...
SFO-I currently has 156 active flight attendants. On 01NOV, 128 SFO-I flight attendants will fall back to domestic!!!!
These numbers come from the Flight Service website. But, how can they be correct? SFO-I still has the Honolulu turn out of SFO. How can they operate with only 28 flight attendants?
SFO-I currently has 156 active flight attendants. On 01NOV, 128 SFO-I flight attendants will fall back to domestic!!!!
These numbers come from the Flight Service website. But, how can they be correct? SFO-I still has the Honolulu turn out of SFO. How can they operate with only 28 flight attendants?
Brace, brace, brace...
SFO-I currently has 156 active flight attendants. On 01NOV, 128 SFO-I flight attendants will fall back to domestic!!!!
These numbers come from the Flight Service website. But, how can they be correct? SFO-I still has the Honolulu turn out of SFO. How can they operate with only 28 flight attendants?
Three days after the cancellation of 128/129 SJC-NRT-SJC on Oct 28 - are the FAs for that flight based in SFO?
jimntx
Veteran
Yes. SFO-I covers all International flights for Bay Area airports--this would include OAK if there were Intl flights from there.
However, I know WHY the fallback--i.e., the cancellation of SJC-NRT. But that begs the question about the remaining SFO-I service. They do an HNL turn from SFO. IIRC, it is a daily service on a 767. How can they cover that with only 28 flight attendants which according to the Flight Service website will be all that is left.
Mind you, the numbers come from two sources. If you look at SFO under the My Base links, the Home page from SFO says that SFO-I has 156 active f/as as on Sept. 2006. A PDF file under Crew Resources lists 128 flight attendants by name that are either voluntarily (28) or involuntarily (100) falling back to the SFO-D base effective 01NOV. That would leave only 28 f/as to cover the SFO-HNL turn.
jimntx
Veteran
Correction. I went back and looked at the fall back PDF. I had misread it. There are, in fact, 28 volunteers. However, the Involuntary list starts with #29, not #1. So, there is a total fallback of 100, not 128. That leaves 56 active flight attendants in the base.
56 sounds about right. RDU has about 90 for their London flight, three on three off. I imagine there are 3 lines on HNL turns for SFO plus the random open sequences and reserves.
That means SFO-I pilots and FAs are going to have to work closely with each other for trip coverage. Calling in sick, when not really sick, is not an option when your base is so tiny. The people you hosed know exactly who you are and they
will all be out to get you.
One of the beautiful things about being based at a larger base is that there are more people willing to pick up anything to get hours and you have way more flexibility trading and dropping your trips.
jimntx
Veteran
I agree. SFO-I will be like a satellite base. If you don't hold up your end of the bargain, you'll be a marked person.
For that matter, why don't they just make SFO-I a satellite of LAX-I? It would eliminate the management overhead--no FSM, no payroll person, no training person. (Of course, those positions might be included in SFO-D already. If anyone knows, please post answer.)
Wait a minute! What was I thinking? That would require reduction/elimination of management positions.
The company needs managers to make sure that the flight attendants are being worked until they drop. God forbid we should have a recall.
For that matter, why don't they just make SFO-I a satellite of LAX-I? It would eliminate the management overhead--no FSM, no payroll person, no training person. (Of course, those positions might be included in SFO-D already. If anyone knows, please post answer.)
Wait a minute! What was I thinking? That would require reduction/elimination of management positions.
The company needs managers to make sure that the flight attendants are being worked until they drop. God forbid we should have a recall.
