Cwa Update 08/11/04

noname

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
293
0
PLEASE POST AND DISTRIBUTE TO YOUR CO-WORKERS
Additional stories are on WWW.CWA.NET


08/11/2004
CWA'ers meet with management to respond to their last proposal and to hear details of their proposed profit sharing plan...
Present for the company were ECLAT consultant Doug McKeen, Vice President of Reservations Kerry Carstairs, Vice President of Customer Service Donna Paladini, management from the labor relations, operations, and benefits departments, attorneys and contracted analysts.
Present for the union were Local presidents, CWA analysts, staff and attorneys.
CWA'ers presented our response to management's last proposal. We began with a review of the process so far by presenting this preamble:


This, CWA's third written cost-reduction offer (6/22, 7/13, 8/11), is a continuation of our effort to respond to management's stated need to reduce costs to avoid bankruptcy, become more competitive, and put the business on a more sound footing. These proposals describe substantial changes to the CWA Passenger Service Employees collective bargaining contract designed to save millions of dollars in annual costs.
More specifically, this cost-reduction offer addresses management's July 27 proposal, attempting to accommodate many of management's concerns about our earlier offers, and drawing management's attention to major parts of our earlier offers to which they have not responded.
Finally, this cost-reduction offer reflects the CWA stance, stated at the bargaining table and at subsequent meetings, that management's July 27 proposal was not a good-faith response to our earlier offers. That proposal incorporated all the cost savings of those CWA offers, but did not reduce in any way the company's long-standing demand to radically reduce or eliminate employee income and benefits to conform to an imaginary contract composed of the worst (from the employee's point of view) of the working conditions at America West and/or Jet Blue. Management's proposals would, among other things, cut employee take-home pay by about 50 percent.

CWA'ers then presented a revised Early Out program designed to reduce cost by reducing seniority, and a revised voluntary Work At Home Res proposal designed to reduce cost by eliminating overhead as well as lower pay grade.
We also drew management's attention to the part of our Early Out program that called for those filling buyout vacancies to be placed on the X Scale (the Southwest Airlines scale) which is, itself, a cost saving feature that management did not acknowledge or respond to in their last proposal.
We also presented several proposed Scope modifications that would cover work not currently covered by the contract and provide additional job security for our members. These changes are warranted by the fact that our contract is fully competitive in terms of salaries and productivity with competitors doing similar work.
Management asked for a meeting of our analysts for Friday (that we agreed to) and also asked to have a meeting early next week to reply to our proposal, which we will set up as soon as they name some dates.
Management then reviewed their profit sharing proposal, which is posted at our website www.cwa.net. These are the primary points they made:


The profit sharing plan is part of the overall package of pay and benefit cuts presented on July 27;
The plan will not be offered if the company again goes bankrupt;
If the company's profit margin is in the range of 0% - 5%, the plan will provide for an annual pool of 10% of all pre-tax profits to be shared by all employees on the basis of your W2 annual earnings (i.e. your percent share of the pool would be the same as your percent share of all employees earnings combined).
If the company's profit margin is above 5%, the pool would also include 25% of all pre-tax profits above 5%.
They estimate that the profit share for a person at top of scale for our group for the year 2005 would be about $1,013 (based on a top rate of pay of $13.10), and by 2011 that would go to $2,977. (These are estimates, because nobody can predict how profitable the company will actually be in those years).
CWA'ers ended the meeting by presenting copies of our petition (see your stewards for details) signed by over 2,000 agents and reps in the last two days. We will continue to collect signatures and present the additional amounts at our next meeting.
We'll keep you informed as we have further meetings with management.
CWA Local Officers and Staff




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
The profit sharing plan is a big part of the plan?!? :mf_boff:

The plan will not be offered if the company again goes bankrupt.... :disguise:

Nothing from nothing is nothing.......... :bleh:
 
So I might get $500 (since I'll be a bottom feeder) back in what year that we become profitable at the end of the fiscal year after giving back how many thousands of dollars??? And IF they don't outsource my work if it is more ecomical to the company before all this happens. :angry:
My vote is NO!
 
That "profit sharing" idea is a joke. They must think we're really pumkin heads to give up almost 50% of our pay for the possibility of maybe getting less than a thousand bucks some in the future? Keep the profit sharing, give it to the carpetbaggers in Crystal Palace and give us a living wage to support our families.
 
/style_emoticons/default/mf_boff.gif/style_emoticons/default/mf_boff.gif/style_emoticons/default/mf_boff.gif
 
Here is my idea of a conession package that might pass the vote of members from the CWA. $18.05 an hr. thats a $2.00 an hr. cut. No more Double time, No more shift premium, Give up one week vacation, and offer the CWA buyout before the vote, so that the employees leaving don't vote on things that affect those staying on the job. Love to hear from all you CWA members about this idea.
 
Doesn't sound bad..although with management and other departments getting raises..I think it's time to just say NO. I feel it's too late now, after mgmt insulted us with $13.10 hr, a proposal that was so bad it make me wonder, what is the motive...we all know there is one. We have all lost our sense of job security after many of us have moved more than once to retain a job, I think we are ready for the outcome. We thought by giving prior we were doing the right thing, only to see management raises, cost saving ideas dismissed, if only the company would start to listen to the workers...management has made some bad choices and continues to do such.

We have been disrespected as a work group for a long time, which is very sad...the ato workers are frontline everyday...and on the reservations end we can either make that call a professional one or the other option is send them shopping elsewhere. This is where the a big portion of the revenue is collected.

You should here the number of passengers that state they called DL and couldn't understand the agent (from India) or the agent could not understand what they were asking....and how frustrating it was.....this is where US is heading..scary.
 
As far as 18.00 hours...it might pass, but personally I think the job is worth 20.00/hour or more. Too much abuse in working with the traveling public to put up with less. The agents will not go for any more cuts in vacation. You see its like this...vacation is like mental therapy in the airline industry. You go with less and you start going crazy. 90% of the agents work every single weekend. With their vacation they are at least guaranteed 4 to 5 weekends off a year. You have to remember they don't get holidays either. No when you work for a company that is open 24/7...the vacation is imperative.
 
Profit sharing is definately a joke! Give up vacation time that is desperately needed...no way! Double time is deserved if putting in that much time in this God forsaken job to cover scheduling deficiencies and lack of employees, excess call volume due to rediculous fare rules and transfer policies. What little shift premiums are left is also deserved for the agents that never get to see their families at night, week ends and holidays! To give up $2.00 more to these thieves to squander is a BIG "NO". One cent is too much! The buy out is also a joke. How long will that small amount of money last after taxes? Maybe three or four months at best. Then what? It will be better to ride it out until the end and collect unemployment and possibly, if an office closes, to get severance pay.

Just say NO!
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #14
$18/hr is easier to take than the proposed $13/hr, but with full pay for vacation/holiday time reinstated. AND No change to the current method of vacation accrual.
The cutting off of health benefits for retirees is also a big problem. Especially since the majority are topped out and looking forward to the day (in the not so distant future) when we are old enough to retire. Elimination of retiree health will ensure most employees staying until they are old enough for Social Security.
I don't know what the answer is, but the current company proposal and profit sharing earn my "no" vote. It would be in my best interest to ride it out and if the company goes under, take unemployment at my current rate of pay and return to school for retraining.
I believe that every employee working here has some sort of fall back plan.
I would like to see US survive, but am unsure that it will actually happen.
 
CWA ....... proposal.....

Something like this maybe....
*$18.00 per hour - top of scale

*Premiums for CSD/PSS remain.

*If one week of vacation is eliminated - than return the remaining weeks to full pay. (currently it is at 75%). OR keep vacation weeks at current number and reinstate full rate of pay for vacation, and give up holidays.

Sick time remains (5 days per year) - file the PDO idea under ideas that don't fly.

LEAVE 401K as is.
LEAVE medical/dental for retirees in effect.

This might float boys & girls..... ;)

Lets try being reasonable, it is hard to ask for major reductions in benefits when you are giving out pay increases to management groups. I know, I know...affraid you might loose a good employee. Well, here's a thought.....if they were so good, why exactly are we were we are today? :down:

And here is an example of waste.....
When a passenger calls res for assist with a website question, we have to take time (=money) to explain to them that we can not help them they have to call somewhere else and unfortunately, we can not transfer them. If the web site customer service was in house - US would have more control over cost and revenue. Sounds simple, but true. US contracts the web site out and pays a set amount every month to this company to maintain this site and provide customer service. This amount is a set fee and they are considered a vendor.
Now, if this work would be done in house, you could control your costs and call flow to selected reps who are trained to assist with the website as well as other job functions. Yes you would pay reps medical and benefits (as you are now) but the reps would be able to better assist the customer and quickly move one to the next call thereby freeing sales reps to take nothing but sales calls. As the system is designed now, time is wasted advising the customer that we can not help them.

thanks for the chance to vent....
good luck everyone....
 

Latest posts

Back
Top