J, I'm standing precariously at 17335 and there are 693 active fas under me. That could change from day to day. I was 17334 2 days ago and for some reason, I slid down to 17335. either someone junior to me(please don't quit!) left or someone senior to me came back from leave/inactive status. I'm just not going to worry about it. I'll fly more and take things one day at a time. Worse case scenerio, I get furloughed again. Best case, I might get bumped back to domestic but at least I'll have a job.
F/A Attrition ONLY
- Thread starter jimntx
- Start date
- Status
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
Plans change, M. Just because AA has traditionally given a lot of notice doesn't mean they always can or will.
But I do believe you on the attrition. AA's been beat up around here for not recalling and staffing at higher levels over the past year. That seems to have been a smart move when you start pulling capacity out of the system because it means fewer repeat furloughs.
AA's going to be painted as the bad guy regardless of the outcome, but the big question I have is how much is APFA going to wind up giving back in order for the company to float excess heads and avoid furloughs? The same question could easily apply to the other groups...
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #64
Well, yes they can and will. That is if they wish to remain in compliance with the Federal law which requires them to send out WARN letters a minimum of 60 days in advance of a furlough.
If you believe that attrition will reduce an overage of 3000 f/as in a reasonable amount of time, I have a nice bridge to sell you. The average monthly attrition for 2008 is 60 f/as per month. That's ALL attrition--quit, died, retired, and fired. At that rate it will only take 50 months for the overage to be eliminated. And, don't give me the baloney about "Oh, there are going to be mass retirements this summer. I have a friend whose hairdresser's dog groomer's second cousin (once removed) lives next door to someone who does something with the union and they said it." I've been hearing that story since I was recalled from furlough in Nov. 2004. I've been trying to get transferred back to DFW since. The LOWEST I have ever been on the transfer list for DFW is #152 and I am substantially higher than that right now.
Not a sou. The APFA will throw as many junior f/as under the bus as is necessary to maintain the perks of the senior f/as--such as never flying and never having to retire. There was a time in the labor history of the U.S. that unions were about preserving jobs first, then deal with "quality of life" issues. This is not the APFA's approach.
I have seen it posted previously about how many crews were needed to staff certain trips per month but I do not remember what the numbers were or where I saw them. I am curious how many FAs would need to be gone in order to cut 5% of our schedules. Most people I have been flying with believe it is a lot less than the 3,000 FAs that is being speculated.
I know a bunch of people who are considering overage leaves. The problems they are weighing:
-if they take an overage leave it won't count toward years of service when they are ready to retire
-they can work 35 hours and have medical so why take a leave and pay medical?
-if they stay than they may have a problem unloading most of their schedule or even moving days around easily because traditionally it is the more junior people who pick things up. Everything goes into lockdown, regarding hiboard, if the people who always drop their trips go on leave and the junior people who pick up aren't here.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #67
That 'and' should be an 'or'.
If the senior people who always drop go on leave, there will be jobs for some of the junior people. If the senior people don't go on leave, the junior people get furloughed and yes, then the senior people would actually have to fly. 
Oh the horror of it all. Have to work on airplanes that have passengers on them just because you are a flight attendant! What despicable torture will the company think up next????? 
That 'and' should be an 'or'.
LOL. I see what you mean. The big problem I see is that the people like me, who have scheduling ADHD (I just don't like to fly my schedule all month,even if I like it) will suffer when the people who usually pick up/drop are no longer there. We've seen in the past where hiboard becomes rife with those only willing to TT for specific things, nothing moves, and we all suffer.
I think scheduling flexibility is a must in our profession. I like the fact that people can drop their entire schedule and that it greatly benefits all of us when they can and do. If we all flew our schedule, and we were unable to pick up more hours easily, than most of us couldn't afford to work here. How many people do you know, who have no other source of income (spouse or other job), who could survive on 70 hour FA pay per month?
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #69
I agree for the most part. Fortunately, I DO have an income separate from AA. I've said many times that I do not know how the young people at my seniority live on what we make--even flying high time. And, speaking of HIBOARD (which violates my original request to keep this thread to attrition ), in SLT you see where someone has put a 7.30hr turn on the board. They want "a higher time trip, no sign-in before 0900, must be back by 1600. No #1." A friend who used to own a trip trade service at SLT said to me "What the h*ll bidsheet are they looking at? I don't see any trips like that on my bidsheet."
I do still (and always will) have a problem with people who never fly, but refuse to retire. There is no justification for such behavior. Plus, they all say (I have connections among those who do retirement seminars) that "when they get ready to retire they are going to fly high time for 4 years to build up their pension payment." They then get highly incensed when they find out that only the first 85 hours you fly each month counts toward pension service.
It's always been that way, but they insist that this must be a concession that the union made but didn't tell them about. Because "my girlfriend flew 120 hours/month for her last 4 years and she says that it all counted toward her pension credit." Friend just thinks it did.
), in SLT you see where someone has put a 7.30hr turn on the board. They want "a higher time trip, no sign-in before 0900, must be back by 1600. No #1." A friend who used to own a trip trade service at SLT said to me "What the h*ll bidsheet are they looking at? I don't see any trips like that on my bidsheet." I do still (and always will) have a problem with people who never fly, but refuse to retire. There is no justification for such behavior. Plus, they all say (I have connections among those who do retirement seminars) that "when they get ready to retire they are going to fly high time for 4 years to build up their pension payment." They then get highly incensed when they find out that only the first 85 hours you fly each month counts toward pension service.
It's always been that way, but they insist that this must be a concession that the union made but didn't tell them about. Because "my girlfriend flew 120 hours/month for her last 4 years and she says that it all counted toward her pension credit." Friend just thinks it did.
I agree for the most part. Fortunately, I DO have an income separate from AA. I've said many times that I do not know how the young people at my seniority live on what we make--even flying high time. And, speaking of HIBOARD (which violates my original request to keep this thread to attrition
yes, attrition only. Right.
Don't get me started on the tt service thing. There are too many and they all seem to be sucking for the people who use them but the morons continue to refuse to use hiboard. If we all used hiboard, we'd all be better off. I'd also like to know how stupid some of these people are that they continue to OE 100 hours worth of trips each month. If you are going to take the time to fly 100 hours than wouldn't it behoove you to learn how to do a double trip trade. It's not like it's rocket science either.
I don't care if they never retire and don't work. I do care if they use a service to bid for them and drop those trips through a service. That's impeding my life. I don't believe I should have to pay someone to come to work because someone else is paying to get out of working. I also care if the same people who drop almost everything don't know how to do their job when they do come, try to shirk work when they show up, have no clue how to sign into the computer, and overall just add nothing to our work force. I also don't believe 35 hours for full medical cuts it.
I drop my months through a service. I need to know it is taken care of. I do not trust giving my SI to someone else. Mistakes and screw overs, haunt me from the past. Plus if my HiBoard says 241 or OE, I do not want you to trade my LHR or hightime 2 day for some 5 hour turn or 10 hour 2 day. Many people use a TT service to avoid those headaches.
So, do you fly then?
The amount of times that people really take it upon themselves to randomly plot things on your schedule pales in comparison to the amount of screw ups the bid services make and the headaches their existence cause for those who actually fly a full schedule. I guess, once again, we're going to have to agree to disagree.
kirkpatrick
Veteran
I've been told the number of FA's necessary to support an MD80 is 20-21, 27-28 for a 757. So 50 MD80's grounded should result in about 1000 heads. 3000 would mean 150, or half the 80 fleet. I find that scenario a bit unlikely, especially all in one fell swoop. There is no magic number above which airlines can no longer do business. Prices will have to rise to reflect the cost of doing business, and that's already happening. A lot of people are going to continue to fly in a lot of airplanes to a lot of places, and I see AA being a part of that.
If aircraft are to be grounded, I think it's much more likely to be a gradual process; speeding up parking of the oldest 80's and looking for international opportunities for the newer 737's coming on line.
The last big furlough in July 2003 was a result of a massive concessionary contract change, and resulted in 3250 furloughs. The company had no problem getting 1350 FA's to voluntarily take a year off. The problem with AA's OVL program is that it isn't open ended. The 1350 had to come back the next year. UA, on the other hand, allowed people to stay out as long as there were people on the street. They also had a recall bypass option. AA should have both those things; they're strictly no cost items and save jobs for people who want to fly. In the event there should be a furlough, those things should be APFA's number one concern.
MK
B
BigBangTheory
Guest
I'm glad to at least have a union, during these up & down times in our industry. I'm not a fan of the APFA but, its better then nothing. The question is KP...will they do the right thing?
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well Jim, I KNOW you're going to find THIS fact distasteful, (and knowing you situation I can't say I would blame you.)
Saving union Jobs, ........and.......Seniority....ARE the "2" most important things to organized labor, and though every union will NEVER admit it, they ALWAYS prefer to save jobs, because of Dues money.
However, knowing the very DNA of a Union, when faced without having no choice between A. saving jobs,....or....B. Seniority,..........Seniority will ALWAYS be the #1 thing protected.(the Holy Grail)
Last in,........First out !!!!
I know you well enough, to be certain that you believe that,...perhaps Logically, as opposed to emotionally.
And as ALWAYS, I wish all you F/A's near the "slicing blade" the very best of luck !!!!
Folks like Fly D Coop, yourself, Kirkpatrick, and others that I don't know, I'm "rubbing my rabbits foot" like crazy !!
- Status
