Decision on Non-Rev board by seniority announcement.

[FLYUSAIRWAYS]

I understand that this afternoon, an announcement will be made regarding the arbitration case with the CWA.

 

[FLYUSAIRWAYS]

CWA lost.  No boarding by seniority.  23 pages of why not.

 

[john john]

Fast fingers Internet and apps won. Beat out DOH

 

[AANOTOK]

CWA lost.  No boarding by seniority.  23 pages of why not.

So, is that two down and one to go, 700W? B)

 

[AANOTOK]

Fast fingers Internet and apps won. Beat out DOH

Don't feel bad john john, with a little bit of practice and a black market app, you too can board a plane the right way.

 

[bob@las-AA]

So, is that two down and one to go, 700W? B)

 
But ?.....but?......700 said that they had "Two precedent setting grievances! ", and they can't do that because it was contractual! Funny stuff!

 

[WorldTraveler]

yes, 700 droned on endlessly about how AA's system would be overturned. Interestingly, he is nowhere to be found in this discussion now.

Can I guess that one of the arguments from the pages that were presented is that non-rev benefits are at the company's choice of how they can be administered and they aren't negotiated? that argument was made many times here.. I'd like to see if it stood up.

AA had their system which has worked for their people, AA was both the larger and the surviving company, and it is hard to imagine how someone would realistically expect that AA would change in this case.

So is this the end to any and all formal objections to the merged AA pass policy?

 

[700UW]

The AFA did have an arbitration that they won after the HP/US merger.

The PMUS fleet CBA specifically says travel by DOH so that case still has to be heard.

 

[AANOTOK]

The AFA did have an arbitration that they won after the HP/US merger.

The PMUS fleet CBA specifically says travel by DOH so that case still has to be heard.

Has a precedent not been set by these two arbitrators?? That is what you based your last argument on.

 

[eolesen]

How much in union dues was wasted on challenging this?....

 

[700UW]

Cheaper than a DFR.

So a union should just let a company violate the CBA?

And the members filed the grievance.

 

[Birdman]

It certainly took a lot of effort and planning in Tulsa with 6,000 plus  competitors to get to the top of the list. The US people will need to learn the tricks of the trade.

 

[Hope777]

yes, 700 droned on endlessly about how AA's system would be overturned. Interestingly, he is nowhere to be found in this discussion now.

Can I guess that one of the arguments from the pages that were presented is that non-rev benefits are at the company's choice of how they can be administered and they aren't negotiated? that argument was made many times here.. I'd like to see if it stood up.

AA had their system which has worked for their people, AA was both the larger and the surviving company, and it is hard to imagine how someone would realistically expect that AA would change in this case.

So is this the end to any and all formal objections to the merged AA pass policy?

Fraudster...YES AA Did indeed Change...  Ask Retirees..... they went to the USAirways of Boarding.  So PLEASE check your facts before you make a Statement! You have been Proven WRONG once again !

 

[WorldTraveler]

bitter much?

I am well aware that AA retirees do not board at the same priority as active employees but AA still uses a check-in time system and not DOH.

 

[Hope777]

bitter much?

I am well aware that AA retirees do not board at the same priority as active employees but AA still uses a check-in time system and not DOH.

Did AA Change their Policy????? Yes or No, Nothing More