comatose
Senior
AANOTOK said:
Cat fight hell, they both need to be on medication.
Combined Travel Rules
- Thread starter Bogey
- Start date
Cat fight hell, they both need to be on medication.
eolesen
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2003
- Messages
- 15,959
- Reaction score
- 9,374
AdAstraPerAspera said:
Same language more or less in the IAM contract. All it essentially says is that the AFA & IAM can't be disadvantaged versus other employees. And they're not. So they can kick their heels and cry "contract violation" but I don't see one. Apparently, neither did the labor relations folks who no doubt had the chance to review the proposed policy before HR pushed the button...
I'd settle for both being on moderation (i.e. someone has to approve whatever it is they're posting), but the "ignore" function does seem to work pretty well...comatose said:
I love how Parker is doing his Divide and Conquer with pass travel. Retires against the Active Employees! He did this at USairways when we merged with Cactass!!
Unfortunately This is the Tip of the Iceberg!!!! You spend 30 plus years with your airline then when you retire they change the rules!
EVERYONE NEEDS TO WRITE PARKER AND OPPOSE THIS D2R !!!!!!!
Unfortunately This is the Tip of the Iceberg!!!! You spend 30 plus years with your airline then when you retire they change the rules!
EVERYONE NEEDS TO WRITE PARKER AND OPPOSE THIS D2R !!!!!!!
eolesen
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2003
- Messages
- 15,959
- Reaction score
- 9,374
Parker isn't doing anything except for adopting AA's travel policies.
Besides, what's there to gain by playing "divide and conquer" with retirees??? Heartless as it will sound, it's not their airline anymore... Their airline is now a memory.
Most airlines I've worked with (which in consulting adds up pretty quickly...) put retirees at a lower travel priority than they do their active employees. And it makes perfect sense if you step back away from the issue a bit.
The reasoning behind AA's policy (and I'd know, since I managed it for about 3 years...) is that active employees typically have limited time off, and if they don't get back home for work, there are consequences for the company as well as the employee. Retirees are supposed to be retired, and presumably have more flexibility on when they have to be somewhere.
Maybe that's an outdated concept now (I know lots of technically retired people who still find it necessary to work for a living...), but the concept still stands: the folks who are still on payroll deserve priority. Especially if you work for one of those companies where retirees outnumber those on payroll, which I suspect is the case when you consider the combined AA/US/HP/TW retiree population...
Besides, what's there to gain by playing "divide and conquer" with retirees??? Heartless as it will sound, it's not their airline anymore... Their airline is now a memory.
Most airlines I've worked with (which in consulting adds up pretty quickly...) put retirees at a lower travel priority than they do their active employees. And it makes perfect sense if you step back away from the issue a bit.
The reasoning behind AA's policy (and I'd know, since I managed it for about 3 years...) is that active employees typically have limited time off, and if they don't get back home for work, there are consequences for the company as well as the employee. Retirees are supposed to be retired, and presumably have more flexibility on when they have to be somewhere.
Maybe that's an outdated concept now (I know lots of technically retired people who still find it necessary to work for a living...), but the concept still stands: the folks who are still on payroll deserve priority. Especially if you work for one of those companies where retirees outnumber those on payroll, which I suspect is the case when you consider the combined AA/US/HP/TW retiree population...
The old US guard mentality is seniority rules all over anything else (including current active employees), it is ridicules how they clinged to it. BTW it is almost exclusively the old Allegheny folks, the PSA, Piedmont and AWA folks could care less.
ContUNITEus
Veteran
- Joined
- May 4, 2011
- Messages
- 501
- Reaction score
- 580
Me as an eastie, used to also complain about the east pushing everything seniority down your throat.
Seniority this, Seniority that, even for stuff that you could never imagine as being seniority driven - yet - seniority again, down your throat.
Seniority this, Seniority that, even for stuff that you could never imagine as being seniority driven - yet - seniority again, down your throat.
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
UPNAWAY said:
They always said "You'll be senior someday".
They think they deserve their pick of everything on the table and the rest of us are suppose to be happy with the leftovers.
What a bunch of jerks.
your contract maybe... but its already been proven its in the US FA contract... i imagine if you had something in your contract and the company said oh you know what for everyone else its a privilege we know we negotiated to you this but never mind you would be throwing a fit and you know it737823 said:
700UW said:
The question i have is what does the wording Online non rev travel... the word online is the question it doesnt say all non rev travel and i imagine that means something like when on duty moving from station to station to get to the next leg of their flight boarding is done by seniority order... its to insure that the senior FAS dead head first so not to lose out on a leg.. and lose out on pay. i think that there is more to this story than anyone is discussing... how often do you see an fa trying to non rev out of their home which is different than their home base and in this instance in uniform they get to nonrev and its done in seniority order... i
im only guessing on my two examples so please dont light me up FA's but there is something fishy here i think the language is to protect senior FAS to make sure they have a better chance to not get stuck and miss out on flights and pay. and when its between two fAS that the most senior will go regardless of who is first to fly that day
And it has nothing to do with actual off duty non rev travel where they are to follow the same rules as anyone else
that said
i dont know for sure if any of that is true so dont come b=itching to me if im wrong but please dont come at me if you yourself have no idea whats true and whats not... im focusing only on the part of the language that says online non rev travel... and nothing else
ilmbeaches
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2013
- Messages
- 17
- Reaction score
- 10
I'm an AA retiree for the last 10 years, worked 36+. Not thrilled with D2R but AA was the only carrier who bunched us in with everyone else so its not a surprise. It could be way worse, we could have nothing. There are way worse things in life 😉
MetalMover
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,543
- Reaction score
- 2,410
I consider myself a "senior" person. But with respect to seniority-priority non rev travel, I believe the first come first serve system is the correct and fairest one.traderjake said:
For me seniority is the correct means of alluding to when it comes to shift, day off and vacation bidding and most importantly when it comes to layoffs. ALL employees have non rev travel privileges and are therefore equal.
We all have the options of booking our flights in advance from the comfort of home on our computers, laptops and smartphones.
May the quickest fingers win!
With respect to retirees and parents...well I am closer to retirement than I would like to admit, but I still believe that the ACTIVE employee should always have the priority.
