A contract for US FAs must be completed prior to any new merger deal.

[N965VJ]

Either way you look at it..there a huge group out there who thinks our contract sure does look quite nice....(American)

Like that huge group that you claimed was going to vote in this TA?

You had a contract presented to you. Should have taken it and STFU. All FAs that voted against it should be moved to the unemployment line.

Well, if you want to just roll over and take whatever scraps are thrown at you, might as well show AFA the door and save $39 a month in dues. Everyone knows how valuable Tempe thinks their front line employees are. :huh:

2) 3% if/when prefbid is implemented is completely incorrect. Compensation was not dependent upon PBS: Work rule changes were dependent upon PBS.

If/when is right - here's exactly what the TA says about PBS:

The Company plans to implement PBS, including associated rules of this Agreement,
within eighteen (18) to twenty-four (24) months following ratification of the Agreement,
but in no case earlier than eighteen (18) months following ratification.

That's not exactly rock solid, is it? Oh, and the RSVs still have to suffer with trips awarded out of seniority. Personally, I don't see anything in the improvement of quality of life for RSVs to vote for this TA.

Can someone tell me how many years of seniority it takes to hold a Secondary Line in PHL and CLT these days?

 

[Whatnow?]

Like that huge group that you claimed was going to vote in this TA?



Well, if you want to just roll over and take whatever scraps are thrown at you, might as well show AFA the door and save $39 a month in dues. Everyone knows how valuable Tempe thinks their front line employees are. :huh:



If/when is right - here's exactly what the TA says about PBS:



That's not exactly rock solid, is it? Oh, and the RSVs still have to suffer with trips awarded out of seniority. Personally, I don't see anything in the improvement of quality of life for RSVs to vote for this TA.

Can someone tell me how many years of seniority it takes to hold a Secondary Line in PHL and CLT these days?

Reserves have overwhelmingly stated they prefer the current LTO system in favor of the proposed seniority based system....one of the many reasons the Reserves didn't care for the Reserve section in the agreement. PHL/CLT currently is at 12-13 years to hold a Secondary line this time of year and probably 13 the rest of the year??

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

You get an IMMEDIATE raise but KEEP the current contracts/workrules for at least 1.5 to 2 years.

That effectively makes this a 3-3.5 year contract if it ran to it's full term.

Coincidentally, that 1.5 to 2 year period would be a reasonable time frame for a merger to take place and a NEWER contract to be negotiated.

 

[Onestep2flt]

You get an IMMEDIATE raise but KEEP the current contracts/workrules for at least 1.5 to 2 years.

That effectively makes this a 3-3.5 year contract if it ran to it's full term.

Coincidentally, that 1.5 to 2 year period would be a reasonable time frame for a merger to take place and a NEWER contract to be negotiated.

I am a little confused with this logic. You seem worried about keeping the current contract for another couple of years. It took seven to get to the point where your company all the sudden wanted to "negotiate" with you. The flight attendant group is not as stupid as you seem to think. They knew the risk involved with a possible merger. It did not take too long to figure out that your management team was up to something. All the risks you have brought up are valid concerns. They are however based on things that may or may not happen, the tentitive agreement was not. You are telling them they should have voted on an inferior agreement because the alternitive would be worse.

The one thing I will agree with you on is that the surveys need to be filled out! I do understand why there is not a huge response though. Seven years ago they filled out a survey that was all but ignored! They (union) already knew for the most part what the needs and concerns were. I will concede after the wasted seven years and the merger possibilty that priorities change. The problem becomes are they going to actually listen this time around? Time will tell.

I understand that you found the tentittive agreement something you could live with. That is fine as that is what the democratic voting process is all about. It appears you are indicating that 75% of the flight attendant group are morons because they don't think the way you do. I don't think you score any points for tact. Rather than belittle everyone that is not of superior intellect as yourself, why not work toward making the changes that might sway people to actually vote yes with confidence.

 

[galley princess]

It's a good thing that you are on record for being willing to stay on a BANKRUPTCY contract as a negotiating tactic. Once APFA (thanks 700 lol!) takes over what you think will not matter.

You will own this - all 75%. Enjoy and keep the KoolAAide handy.

Keep reciting the mantra - BANKRUPTCY is good! - take a drink of KoolAAide - BANKRUPTCY is good!

Have one on me.

Your going to need it because you have nooooooooooooothing to offer but a downside.

This will be your fault to.

Umm hysteria much?

This conversation is moot. It was voted down.

You had a good point about the survey.

The rest is just drama.

Get over it.

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

This conversation is moot. It was voted down.

What do you propose happens next?

You can't offer anything other than a 6 year old bankruptcy contract

The conversation is just beginning about what happens with a merger.

APFA (thanks 700 lol!) is going to be wondering what kind of morons would be willing to not only lower the bar on their own negoiations but also APFA's joint negotiations with the company.

Good one!

You show how ocified you and your shortsighted brethern's thought process is when the best you can offer is a six year old bankruptcy contract and then say "that's good enough for me!" All you have to offer is keeping F/A's standard of living lower than industry standard.

Can't fix stupid.

Balls in your court. What do you plan on doing about?

My bet is nothing and there lies the problem.

 

[galley princess]

I'm not going to spoon feed anyone who really doesn't want to hear/ read/ see anything.

No one said that a bankruptcy contract is okay.

What I SAID is that the TA was so bad as to make the status quo preferable.

Is that clear enough for you? You disagreed, that's okay, but 75% didn't agree with you.

The insulting insinuations that US f/as didn't know what they were voting for are just that. Insulting and untrue. I never saw a document so scrutinized.

You were right on about the survey. That's the first step. The former JNC was completely out of touch with what US f/as really wanted.

I'm guessing, but my gut tells me that f/as don't want that much change. They want their sick time back, more vacation and a decent raise. LTO is bad, but not as bad as what was proposed. I think reserves want another day off and a higher guarantee, but again, I am guessing.

The thing is, that nasty reserve TA mess represented quite a bit of money, money that is better devoted to their 12th day off and higher guarantee.(imho) If US reserve f/as fill out the survey THEY can tell the union what they want.

American does throw us a ringer, absolutely, but really? This bunch won't get their act together for years, much less merge three f/a groups. The clock is ticking. We can't be parked forever, if indeed we were parked, which is likely until after the election. Unless US sees it as advantageous to negotiate now. They haven't negotiated in good faith so far. What we were presented with wasn't better than our current abysmal contract and represented zero cost to the company. BTW, we're not alone. The mechanics stated the same thing years ago when they got their contract. It was cost neutral. Six years later, we do not deserve cost neutral.

What WAS ADVANTAGEOUS to US was to get us into that abysmal 5 year TA trap. Too bad for them. I thank God US f/as saw through it. (Most of them)

You can keep posting that the sky is falling.

It seems to be your thing.

I am waiting for the outcome of the survey. What I am wary of is any attempt by the union to resubmit that unacceptable TA in any kind of drag. No one is going to go for it the second time around.

Sigh.

You can keep the spoon.

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

What I SAID is that the TA was so bad as to make the status quo preferable.

This is the kind of shortsightedness that will not only screw the 25% who voted YES but the 75% who voted NO.

You can keep your head in the sand like an ostrich and pretend that a bankruptcy contract is going to do anybody any good, whether AFA or APFA.

You can almost hear the company laughing at you.

If you need to get your head out of the sand ...I'll lend you a spoon but a backhoe might work better.

 

[MyrnaMinkoff]

Wow, so much misinformation in that post. I can't, in good conscience, leave this misinformation posted without correction. Not sure where the TA is posted on the AFAUSAirways site, but I found it on the AFA66 site at http://www.afa66.org/TA.pdf
1) Raises: There were 4 raises in the TA. Assuming we're talking about an East F/A topped out with 15+ years of service, that would go from current east rate of $41.51 to Date of Signing (DOS) $46.00, DOS+18 months $46.46, DOS+36 months $47.16, and DOS+54 months $48.00
2) 3% if/when prefbid is implemented is completely incorrect. Compensation was not dependent upon PBS: Work rule changes were dependent upon PBS. Increases started at Date of Signing.
3) Scope provisions: According to http://afl.salsalabs...blast_KEY=76527 the East scope was retained, and improved.
4) Lost vacation accrual: Vacation max went from 31 days at 18 years to 35 days at 26 years (years 18-35 are still 31 days). Although there was a loss in vacation time for the west, it was more than made up in compensation changes (per the union, they even provided excel spreadsheets so F/As could calculate this).
5) Lost sick leave: Current East sick leave was paid up to 60 hours per year at 70% pay (equivalent to 42 paid hours). TA sick leave was 54 hours per year at 100% pay (54 hours of pay is greater than 42 hours of pay). This is summed up on the East Power Point presentation found at: http://afl.salsalabs...blast_KEY=77251

This information is all from the union...and the reference web pages are given if anyone wants to read it. The amount of misinformation spread on social media is frightening. It makes me sad for those who voted without knowledge (yes or no votes). I wish the best for the FA's get to a single contract soon, as challenging as that may be with the AA situation pending.

[background=rgb(242, 242, 242)]
Bertha, on 01 April 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:[/background][background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]

If I were a betting person,I would bet that you are a member of US Airways management's team[/background]

And your reply was:

I'm sorry, Bertha, but you'd lose that bet...but certainly understand from where you're coming and the concerns. I'm not in the airline industry anymore, but I still take an interest in what's happening. I fly US quite often and was honestly surprised by the No vote. Asking for specifics was my way of trying to understand why refusing a contract that appeared (to me) to be better than the current situation, was better than accepting it. The 'bird in the hand is worth two in the bush' saying was the first thing that came to mind. In any case, I hope the FA's get this resolved soon. Best wishes.



And I say:

Why would your conscience trouble you so much about supposed 'misinformation' being spread if you're only a an outsider, a former airline employee, you claim, but one who still takes an interest in flight attendant contract proceedings? A sort of hobby, I suppose, like pasting rare stamps into an album, but as someone who has no proverbial 'dog in the fight,' as it were, you are awfully passionate about promoting the company agenda. Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

 

[BungeeJumper]

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Methinks that when you can't argue the facts, you should not attack the person who makes the post. When someone posts incorrect information, whether it be intentional lies or ignorant mistruths, silence can be interpreted as agreement and acceptance. Someone posted something totally incorrect, and rationalized it as their reason for voting down the TA. How they voted on TA is not my concern, but passing on incorrect information as truth should be everyone's concern.

I don't work for US, and never have, but I know lots of people who do. Not going to rehash this every time you try to discount my posts by saying I'm management. Stick to facts, please, and let's be civil. Best wishes.

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

Methinks that when you can't argue the facts,

Methinks that MM has a hard time getting genders and information correct and has a predilection for Medieval Faires.

Great combination.

Raise a flagon and a leg of lamb for the AA term sheet fore that is what you will be obligated to. What say you yon knight / princess?

Most exalted knight / princess of Misinformation , the balls in your court - what do you have to offer?

It's your union.

It's your JNC.

What does Merlin have in store for us?

Please don't say a DOUBLE BANKRUPTCY contract is the answer because that would be so wrong.

You must have something better than the AA term sheet - right?

Right? Or maybe that POS is okay with you?

Are you for that POS contract?

What is it you have to offer over the AA POS?

It's your turn now.

How are you going to improve on the AA POS proposal - send a flowery worded medieval times parchment or a sternly worded email.

What is it you are promising over the double bankruptcy contract we have now?

You are for the AA POS and you are as limited in mind as you are in substance.

How are you going to make things better?

 

[MyrnaMinkoff]

Methinks that MM has a hard time getting genders and information correct and has a predilection for Medieval Faires.

Great combination.

Raise a flagon and a leg of lamb for the AA term sheet fore that is what you will be obligated to. What say you yon knight / princess?

Most exalted knight / princess of Misinformation , the balls in your court - what do you have to offer?

It's your union.

It's your JNC.

What does Merlin have in store for us?

Please don't say a DOUBLE BANKRUPTCY contract is the answer because that would be so wrong.

You must have something better than the AA term sheet - right?

Right? Or maybe that POS is okay with you?

Are you for that POS contract?

What is it you have to offer over the AA POS?

It's your turn now.

How are you going to improve on the AA POS proposal - send a flowery worded medieval times parchment or a sternly worded email.

What is it you are promising over the double bankruptcy contract we have now?

You are for the AA POS and you are as limited in mind as you are in substance.

How are you going to make things better?

Uhhhh, I was just quoting Shakespeare, the way people who are moderately well-read might, not expressing any alliance with medievalists or their fairs, or faires, as it were. You seem to be well-acquainted with those, though, I see.

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

Uhhhh, I was just quoting Shakespeare, the way people who are moderately well-read might, not expressing any alliance with medievalists or their fairs, or faires, as it were. You seem to be well-acquainted with those, though, I see.

Methinks that since you own the LEC's and the JNC you would have a better answer than that.

You are in charge now and are responsible for getting us a contract better than the DOUBLE BANKRUPTCY contract that we are on now.

Do something.

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

Uhhhh, I was just quoting Shakespeare, the way people who are moderately well-read might, not expressing any alliance with medievalists or their fairs, or faires, as it were. You seem to be well-acquainted with those, though, I see.

What is it you are doing to get us off this DOUBLE BANKRUPTCY POS contract?

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

What is it you are doing to get us off this DOUBLE BANKRUPTCY POS contract?

Uhhhh, I was just quoting Shakespeare, the way people who are moderately well-read might, not expressing any alliance with medievalists or their fairs, or faires, as it were. You seem to be well-acquainted with those, though, I see.

Stop drinking the KoolAAide. You actually have to think now.

What is it you have to offer, the AA Term sheet. You have got to be kidding!

You're in charge now, and don't say stay on a POS DOUBLE BANKRUPTCY contract.

What do you do now?