American looking to "right-size" the company and staffing levels for the Fall and 2021

[1AA]

It's starting at DFW.....Walked two managers out yesterday.

I wish people stop posting open statements like this. You just don't get walked out without reason.
Post information that has more details and reasons for actions taken.

 

[LuxuryLiner]

I wish people stop posting open statements like this. You just don't get walked out without reason.
Post information that has more details and reasons for actions taken.

They were deemed redundant for the management workforce at DFW and AA no longer had a need for their services. One of them was ex- America West and was moved into DFW to reinvent the wheel and change things to the LUS way of doing things....it failed big time so I guess AA had enough of him.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

too bad for him and i'm not being sarcastic. he appeared to be an all-star at ord, seemed to be on a hall of fame trajectory. i'm not sure what happened, but 2019 was a very bad operational year for aa. dfw900 and the rovers? will company blame the rover nonsense or the AMTs?

lus mngt. need to realize some legacy aa hubs are not phx. memo to self as a shareholder - don't mess with profitable hubs.

my station saw 4 ramp CSMs lose their jobs the other day. in that aftermath, ticket agent CSMs are holding their collective breath. i knew each and thought they were good to very good for the company.

the company also let go of some 'level 2s'. basically, bmas people. they were very good soldiers for aa...one guy was worth triple his weight in gold for the company. good people and i hope aa isn't getting rid of our company's best talent in the trenches.

when all is said and done, these former employees will also be professional victims of the virus.

 

[swamt]

i'm comparing aa's next generation offer to others' (in this case southwest's). aa's 'new' voluntary leave didn't sweeten the offer, southwest did.

in my opinion, aa just wasted cloud space.

when aa comes back with 50% pay for voluntary leaves like southwest, they'll get some takers.

I'm sure they will. And I strongly encourage them to still apply for the unemployment benefits. They may not get the full amount, but could still get a partial even with the 50%. You will never know until you apply. Besides, we all paid into unemployment insurance all our lives, so it's an earned benefit.
Also remember, Southwest may not even accept the ExETO starting in Sep. if they get enough takers on the VSP. Hoping no one gets approved for the ExETO. Why? You might ask? That tells me they got enough takers on the VSP offers that they don't need any more to take off and therefore should not have to layoff anyone. But if still some needed, the ExETO's will also help out as well.
Some will need to get side jobs or p/t to fill in the gaps or at least find a hobby to keep busy.

 

[swamt]

every state is different.

my state will call the company after x-amount of weeks and ask aa: "what is the status of this worker".

aa will reply: "this worker took a voluntary leave and is still out".

according to mngt., this will tip off the state that the worker WAS NOT laid off and took a voluntary leave. this is why they believe they will have to pay back the state.

until then, mngt. told me that my state is approving everything filed due to the virus crisis.

Yes. I can only speak of Tx.
A gentleman emailed a copy of his back and forths with the TWC (unemployment). When he got notified that he was approved it was written as follows: Decision; We can pay you benefits. Reason for Decision; Our Investigation, found your employer laid you off from your last work because of a natural disaster declared by the President.
Now pls also understand. Our time off is called ETO. No words of volunteer involved and they did in fact reduce the hours down to 25% per month.
Since they performed their very own investigation, that tells me they called the co. and verified all the info., if they did not and no one lied on the forms it falls on the TWC not the individuals that paid into the unemployment benefits thru-out their lives.

 

[jimntx]

"Since they performed their very own investigation, that tells me they called the co. and verified all the info., if they did not and no one lied on the forms it falls on the TWC not the individuals that paid into the unemployment benefits thru-out their lives."

Swamt, as a former employee of the the Texas Workforce Commission (although it was called the Texas Employment Commission when I worked for them),I beg to differ with you over last statement. Not you, nor anyone else has ever "paid into the unemployment benefits" now or ever. Unemployment benefits are funded strictly by a tax on employers. The tax is based upon the "size" (in dollars, not number of workers) of the employer's payroll. It is a common misconception on the part of workers that they were due benefits that they had paid for. There is no deduction on your paycheck or anyone else's for unemployment benefits. It's been this way since the Depression of the 30's when the state employment services were created.

P.S. Even the money for Commission staff from clerical workers to the "High" commissioner (not his/her correct title) is funded from the tax.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

don't forget the additional $600 a week from the feds, that's tax monies. may end the last day of july, we'll see.

 

[D7571987]

UA is not offering maint any kind of partial pay to take a COLA, and they wont even guarantee a return after the cola to the same airport.

 

[swamt]

"Since they performed their very own investigation, that tells me they called the co. and verified all the info., if they did not and no one lied on the forms it falls on the TWC not the individuals that paid into the unemployment benefits thru-out their lives."

Swamt, as a former employee of the the Texas Workforce Commission (although it was called the Texas Employment Commission when I worked for them),I beg to differ with you over last statement. Not you, nor anyone else has ever "paid into the unemployment benefits" now or ever. Unemployment benefits are funded strictly by a tax on employers. The tax is based upon the "size" (in dollars, not number of workers) of the employer's payroll. It is a common misconception on the part of workers that they were due benefits that they had paid for. There is no deduction on your paycheck or anyone else's for unemployment benefits. It's been this way since the Depression of the 30's when the state employment services were created.

P.S. Even the money for Commission staff from clerical workers to the "High" commissioner (not his/her correct title) is funded from the tax.

If that is the case then I stand corrected. I was under the impression part of our taxes were distributed (by the gov.) into the unemployment benefits in one way or another. I have read that somewhere a long, long time ago (35-36 years ago when I was on unemployment for a short time) I fully admit I may have thought or read it all wrong. I did know the employers paid into it, but also thought we did as well but just not as much as the employers paid.
Jim, thanks for the clarification.
But, that still doesn't change the idea of as long as there are no lies, fibs or misinformation you should not be asked to pay back. Especially once they have called the employer (as they did in this guys case) and verified. he did say that that was one of the reasons it took nearly 2 months to get the first payout from the TWC, employer verification and the absolute major backlog of filings coming into TWC.

Jim, can you please explain this statement from TWC?
One of the items listed said that the TWC was NOT going to back charge or charge the company (SWA in this case) for the unemployment benefits.
What did that part mean? Is it due to this being called a crisis or declared as a natural disaster by Pres.? Just a bit curious by that statement as the employer has already paid into the unemployment benefits. Thanks in advance Jim.

 

[swamt]

don't forget the additional $600 a week from the feds, that's tax monies. may end the last day of july, we'll see.

And to clarify on the guys unemployment benefits I am talking about, he is NOT receiving the $600 extra on top of the states payments. I wanted to ask why not but not my bus. and he did not let it out voluntarily. Could it be because he is still employed and not 100% without a job maybe? IDK. Maybe Jim could help on that end as well.

 

[swamt]

UA is not offering maint any kind of partial pay to take a COLA, and they wont even guarantee a return after the cola to the same airport.

Oh wow! Did not know that. OUCH! Maybe they will change that when they don't get enough people stepping up?

 

[jimntx]

Jim, can you please explain this statement from TWC?
One of the items listed said that the TWC was NOT going to back charge or charge the company (SWA in this case) for the unemployment benefits.
What did that part mean? Is it due to this being called a crisis or declared as a natural disaster by Pres.? Just a bit curious by that statement as the employer has already paid into the unemployment benefits. Thanks in advance Jim.

As the claim was for loss of employment at SWA, I can only guess. Usually claims filings are the primary source of information for the Commission that the taxes were not paid for this employee. You would be surprised at the number (and corporate names) of companies that do not pay the tax until they have to. The Commission does not have the staff to go out and investigate every company in Dallas to determine who has or has not paid their taxes. IIRC the decision not to collect back taxes is left to the discretion of the hearings officer. It may be that the worker's SSN was recorded incorrectly in SWA's system (and therefore incorrectly in the workforce commission's system), and it appeared that taxes had not been paid, or the employee worked for SWA for such a short time that the employee was gone before a payment was due (say quarterly). I doubt that the payments had been made correctly or the commission would not have questioned the claim. They don't have time to look at every claim. It's only when there is something 'not right" about the claim. The Commission is pretty strict about certifying eligibility for UI benefits, and there is (or was when I worked there) a bias in favor of the worker. The employees at the Commission understand better than you or I that UI benefits are not much (as low as $60/week) and the claimants are probably desperate to get that amount to feed their families. If the taxes were paid, there is a reason for the Commission questioning the claim. And it would be impossible to truly explain the statements you are questioning without knowing the details of the claim. If the amount due is small, and the company in question is one of the good guys, like SWA why bother to collect a minuscule amount. As I said, the Commission is understaffed (always has been) they "pick their battles" carefully to make sure it's worth the effort.

P.S. (Based upon information from pre-1975) you not only have to be unemployed to receive benefits, you have to demonstrate a conscientious effort to seek employment. One job interview/week was not considered a serious attempt to find employment in the "good ole days" when I worked there.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I'm sure they will. And I strongly encourage them to still apply for the unemployment benefits. They may not get the full amount, but could still get a partial even with the 50%. You will never know until you apply. Besides, we all paid into unemployment insurance all our lives, so it's an earned benefit.
Also remember, Southwest may not even accept the ExETO starting in Sep. if they get enough takers on the VSP. Hoping no one gets approved for the ExETO. Why? You might ask? That tells me they got enough takers on the VSP offers that they don't need any more to take off and therefore should not have to layoff anyone. But if still some needed, the ExETO's will also help out as well.
Some will need to get side jobs or p/t to fill in the gaps or at least find a hobby to keep busy.

You don't pay unemployment insurance your employer does.

 

[jimntx]

And to clarify on the guys unemployment benefits I am talking about, he is NOT receiving the $600 extra on top of the states payments. I wanted to ask why not but not my bus. and he did not let it out voluntarily. Could it be because he is still employed and not 100% without a job maybe? IDK. Maybe Jim could help on that end as well.

I haven't a clue. Sorry. After all the UI benefit means Unemployment Insurance. That means (at least to me and the way it was when I worked for them that you is unemployed. That means "not working" LOL. In fact when I worked there, there were some pretty stiff consequences for filing a fraudulent claim. I have to admit that I am confused by all of this largesse being distributed to just about every body. I've been retired for 3 years and I got one of those $1200 checks. I donated the full amount to the North Texas Food Bank and other charities. I didn't ask for the money nor did I deserve it or need it, and knowing the government it would have gummed the works for several weeks if I had tried to send it back. It went to more than one good cause. I have no idea what the rationale is for the $600 checks.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

And to clarify on the guys unemployment benefits I am talking about, he is NOT receiving the $600 extra on top of the states payments. I wanted to ask why not but not my bus. and he did not let it out voluntarily. Could it be because he is still employed and not 100% without a job maybe? IDK. Maybe Jim could help on that end as well.

my state says that if your company cuts your hours worked by even 1 hr., then you are entitled to unemployment, including the $600 from the feds. i know some PTers who were forced (contractually so) to go from 30 hrs a week-20 hours a week, all down to 15 hours a week. they are still working 15 hours a week AND getting unemployment.

you said your tax dollars are at work and you were corrected. i believe you are correct about this $600 weekly from the feds. that is tax payer money.