To All Furloughees and displaced employees!

Lilninj

Member
Aug 21, 2002
48
0
Get your 9/11 letter soon. Remember when the president signed into law the bill that provided the company with loan guarantees? Well, it also provided the employees affected by 9/11 either displaced or furloughed with a federal job preference. To use that preference you must have a personalized letter stating that you were displaced due to cutbacks caused by the terror attacks. So far, noone I have talked to has one. None of the furloughees currently nor employees who transferred. By law, the company is required to provide the employee with this letter. As the company has tried to tell me that two letters is sufficient for U, they are lying. For YOU to use the preference YOU must have the correct letter.
For those who are not planning to take another job, have a happy retirement. For those who are, Good Luck and examine all your options including government jobs. Find some job security for a change. That''s what I did.
Lilninj
 
Aug 19, 2002
1,062
737
The JFK
www.usaviation.com
So how are things at the TSA?
 

Boomer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,141
71
Lilninj,

I know that many leaving this industry want to get it as far behind them as they can; however, for others there is little else they desire.

There are currently laws on the books of the DOL regarding right of First Hire for employees within the airline industry.

The US Supreme Court ( Alaska Airlines v. Brock, Secretary of Labor) and Bowdrey v. UAL are the case law.

For one who is laid off from a carrier to claim the right of first hire with another air carrier, they must first state that they have been laid off. If they have the required qualifications for the requested job, they are to be hired before another applicant not similarly situated. This provision does not supercede recalls from the carriers own laid off employees nor will it cover employees applying for positions to which they do not possess the required qualifications.

Good Luck and God Bless.
 
OP
L

Lilninj

Member
Aug 21, 2002
48
0
Yeah, the Cats were very happy to see me. I am still not working yet, but hopefully soon. I have to get past my physical problems caused by moving of course. Everything will work out fine, I'm sure. I will make just about what I made with U without the recent cuts of course. I knew serving in the military for over 10 years would give me some benefits one day, and finally it starts to pay off. I feel very sorry for all my friends who are not going to be appreciated at U from now on though. Even though this particular cut is only 250 people. Rest assured that the classification switches are coming and coming soon! Why switch the lesser paid employees to that function only saving minimal when they can switch all A-scale employees down to $12/hr from about $18/hr and more. Of course that is their plan, and noone would even doubt it. But the question of how they do it, systemwide or res closure, has been answered now. So, we will now have agents with very little seniority difference doing the same job in the same place at the same time but being paid from two very different pay scales. I am confident that only literally a handful of agents will accept the reclassification and the rest will take an involuntary furlough. Good luck to all of you.

Lilninj
 

x300Udriver

Newbie
Sep 10, 2002
8
0
Lilninj -- Two questions:

1) Specifically, where did you read that employees directly affected and furloughed as a result of 9/11 get federal job preference? Got a website address?

2) What department at U refused to give you the required letter?

Thanks for the tip!

x300Udriver
 

DCAflyer

Veteran
Aug 27, 2002
821
0
I read the Alaska Airlines case referenced above. It indicates that the law referred to was a result of deregulation and affects employees who were airline employees at the time deregulation took effect AND who were employed by an airline for AT LEAST four years. In the case of US Airways, I don't believe any furloughs affected people with more than four years seniority, and especially didn't effect anybody who was an employee during bankruptcy. So this appears not to be of help. I will try to read the UAL case later, as well as brainstorm with my AFA contacts to see if the have heard whether this law was expanded. Somehow, I doubt it because it seems too good to be true. I will post what I find.
 

countrygirl

Newbie
Sep 6, 2002
6
0
I was displaced last October with 33 years seniority and I have a letter stating that my furlough was due to the WTC attacks. I think this is the personalized letter that you are referring to.
 

Boomer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,141
71
Ramp Rogue,

The link is:
Current Trends in Airport and Aviation Litigation

Scroll down to: C. Airline Deregulation Act

Bowdry v. Untied Airlines, Inc., 58 F.3d 1483 (10th Cir. 1995)

Further...............
AIR PASSENGER PROTECTION BILL/Labor Protection Provisions
Air Passenger Protection Act of 1987 . . . S. 1485. Adams et al. amendment No. 1107.

AMENDMENT AGREED TO, 64 - 28
2nd
SYNOPSIS:
Pertinent votes on this legislation include Nos. 359-361. The Adams et al. amendment would amend the Federal Aviation Act of 1985 by extending the Labor Protection Provisions (LPP) policy and transferring the responsibility of administering this policy from the Secretary of Transportation to the Secretary of Labor. More specifically, the amendment would require that in any case in which the Secretary of Labor determines that a transaction or merger would tend to reduce employment or adversely affect the working conditions of any air carrier employee, the Secretary shall impose LPP's, designed to mitigate such adverse consequences.

Opinion The meaning of the word transaction is broad when taken in the context of the Alaska Air v. Brock decision and the accompanying footnotes. The application of LPP's to displaced US Airways personnel relating to the transaction, (Chpt.11 & the ATSB loan process requirements-CONCESSIONS), would seem entirely practical given the election year while remaining within the intent of the legislation.

Again, I'm not a lawyer but when I find something that could be of use; I'll try to pass it on. As far as whether the cases have been overturned by subsequent rulings, one of the real attorneys on the boards will know how to look that stuff up. Good Luck.
 
OP
L

Lilninj

Member
Aug 21, 2002
48
0
The law that gives us displaced airline employees a federal job preference is the same law that provides US Airways with it's Loan Guarantee and the birth of the ATSB. I finally got the letter from HR that works for the guarantee. Apparently I didn't have to use it here though. I am not sure if it's a one time use thing or what but I know they asked me for it before I was technically hired just in case. Now that I still have it, I can use it later for a promotion or lateral move. I was hired as a Lead Transportation Security Screener.

I knew about the job preference from the TV a long time ago but had no details at all. This whole thing came up because the TSA reminded me of it after they saw that I was an airline employee and asked me about it. They told me we must have a personalized letter stating that we were displaced due to the terror attacks to qualify for it.

I have no idea about this United or Alaska case stuff sited above. I just know what I have been informed by the government about the preferences. Always better to get it from the people who would be giving you the guarantee. Hope that helps some of you. Good luck to all my friends and co-workers in finding meaningful employment after US Airways!

Lilninj
 

DCAflyer

Veteran
Aug 27, 2002
821
0
It appears that Lilninj and Boomer are talking about two separate things here. Lilninj is referring to the provision that displaced airline employees are given preference in federal jobs such as security screeners. This has nothing to do with other airlines being required to hire furloughed airline employees. Boomer has referred us to cases relating to laws enacted as part of deregulation which require airlines to hire terminated workers from other airlines, essentialy when an airline goes out of business. My reseach concludes that in most, if not all, cases where US Airways employees were furloughed after 9/11, this law would not apply. The requirements that airlines hire displaced workers applies specificially to long-term airline employees who lost their job as a result of deregulation. Nothing I have read indicates otherwise, including the Alaska Airlines and United cases cited by Boomer. I will do some follow-up research to see if I can conclude otherwise.