You took the job. If you dont like it, feel free to move on. At one time in our career we were all junior. Those ahead of you made it in to a livable career.
2009 Flight Attendant Attrition
- Thread starter jimntx
- Start date
- Status
This is where you and I part ways Jim. I do not begrudge them their flexibility. It is why I stay. Once we lose that we jave nothing. You all knew the nature of the beast when hired. I had been thru 4 airlines before landing at AA. I knew there was no stability, I accepted that. I know about being furloughed, about not being paid you last paycheck, about not having insurance claims paid because your company did not pay the premiums...and I still CHOSE to work for another airline. I have been on reserve almost 19 years now...I CHOOSE to stay. It sucks but again, no one is forcing me to work here, I have CHOSEN.
Read my post above. No one is forcing you to stay here...in fact you are at such low pay, it does not even make sense for you to choose to stay if you haven't been furloughed yet. If you have been furloughed, I think you should prevent yourself more heartache and just move on to an industry that is not as volatile as the travel industry is. CNN/Money has a list online of the top 50 careers right now and we are not on it! But the healthcare industry most certainly is, perhaps you should look into that?
No Mr Chamberlain, we do empathize because we have been there. It is frustrating and it sucks when you are at the bottom. I am still there after 19 years. I have been through 4 airlines, 1 start-up, 2 majors NW & CO, and a charter. I am very empathetic to what they are feeling, but it is a choice you make to work here. This is not a communist country or a dictatorship that decides your occupation, there are opportunities to move on from the airlines, as you very well have shown by establishing a second career after you left. There must be something here that they want, but if so they have to suck it up.
Just because you have been there is no reason to not be empathic, it is even more reason to be be empathic. The rest of your post does not address my suggestion about the nasty comments directed at some junior f/as. Its nasty and you seem to justify the nastiness.
empathy: the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner; also : the capacity for this
So in other words, understand what they are going through, but that doesn't mean other's should be cut out/off so that they may no longer have to feel this. The unempathetic comments are just reaction to the suggestion that others must pay for what they are suffering, in order to end their suffering. Surely you as a psychologist must understand this. Doctor heal thyself.
Thank you,my point exactly. I am glad you were able to be objective about this!
You have negated everyone's argument above...as to why should senior flight attendants leave their job and their flexibility to mitigate the suffering the very junior are going through with the uncertainty of this job, as this would most likely cause suffering on those who have put in so many years and paved so many roads for these junior flight attendants.
Again, thank you! Wow...
jimntx
Veteran
All of you pro-hanging-on-til-death supporters keep twisting my words. I NEVER said that someone who is still flying their line should retire. You're all scared to death that the almighty FLEXIBILITY of the job might be touched before you get to impose yourself on the junior f/as--assuming there are any left by the time you get there.
All along I've only talked about the senior flight attendants who will neither fly nor retire. And, don't drag up your false statistic that is only about 200. Even the union admits this. It is about 200 (actually a little more) "active" flight attendants who haven't flown a trip in over ten years. There are hundreds more who haven't flown a trip in years but less than 10 years.
All along I've only talked about the senior flight attendants who will neither fly nor retire. And, don't drag up your false statistic that is only about 200. Even the union admits this. It is about 200 (actually a little more) "active" flight attendants who haven't flown a trip in over ten years. There are hundreds more who haven't flown a trip in years but less than 10 years.
All along I've only talked about the senior flight attendants who will neither fly nor retire. And, don't drag up your false statistic that is only about 200. Even the union admits this. It is about 200 (actually a little more) "active" flight attendants who haven't flown a trip in over ten years. There are hundreds more who haven't flown a trip in years but less than 10 years.
[/quote]
Jim, then we need to push for threshold flying. Everyone needs to fly a minimum number of hours to be employed. At Delta, fas are required to fly 52 hrs to remain an active employee unless they are on a company approved leave.
[/quote]
Jim, then we need to push for threshold flying. Everyone needs to fly a minimum number of hours to be employed. At Delta, fas are required to fly 52 hrs to remain an active employee unless they are on a company approved leave.
jimntx
Veteran
Minimum Threshhold Flying has already been proposed by the company. The Blessed Order of the Perpetually Trip-Removed have expressed their undying opposition to such a draconian measure. It would ruin the "flexibility" of the job.
At US Airways, you have to fly a minimum of 40 hours a month to even have travel privileges unless you are on an approved leave of some sort. And, if that leave is sick leave, you also don't have travel privileges. Too sick to work = too sick to travel.
At US Airways, you have to fly a minimum of 40 hours a month to even have travel privileges unless you are on an approved leave of some sort. And, if that leave is sick leave, you also don't have travel privileges. Too sick to work = too sick to travel.
jersey777
Veteran
- Joined
- May 24, 2006
- Messages
- 627
- Reaction score
- 73
I am totally against threshold flying. Delta has a 52 hour threshold because that was imposed by Delta management and their flight attendants have absolutely no say in what their pay and benefits are.
jimntx
Veteran
That is true. However, their pay and benefits are better than ours. Delta management has kept the unions out all these years by a very simple tactic. When the union comes in and says "We can get you $2/hr more." The company simply raises the pay rate by $2.50/hr or $3.00/hr." They don't have 25-year f/as still on reserve (like we do at DFW) because EVERYONE except the top 10% (IIRC) in seniority serves reserve 3 days every month.
But then, they don't have the attitude that "It was hell for me in the early days; so, it's going to be hell for you."
But then, they don't have the attitude that "It was hell for me in the early days; so, it's going to be hell for you."
Really, AFA says that AA flight attendants pay and benefits are on average 12,000 dollars a year higher.
AFA comparison chart
Did they vote that in, or was it just imposed on them?
- Status
