F/A Contract Suggestions?

[jimntx]

Jim
You keep beating that dead horse. People have provided arguments here for the flexibility, but you are still envious of the trips you want and can't have. You should have applied as a 20 year old! Most of us are working this job for the flexibility. It certainly isn't for the glamour, (otherwise YOU would have never been hired oh ancient one). I have just taken 6 months off without flying a trip. Junior f/a's picked them up. I lost my 420 and when I return tomorrow, I will officially owe the company $5200 for my medical benefits. I stayed home for family matters. I will not see a dime in my paycheck until April. When I come back now I will be flying extra to make-up my hours. Thank God that I can! I will be doing another flight attendant a favor as so many have done for me by flying my trips. It all eventually equals out, if you had worked here long enough you would realize this. If you don't like our system please leave, retire, whatever! :bleh:

You don't have a clue why I keep mentioning this subject. It has absolutely nothing to do with the trips I can or can not hold. I'm holding 22 hour layovers in ABQ--one of my favorites--this month. Just because you can't see past the end of your nose or the line you can hold (whichever comes first), doesn't mean that everyone thinks that way. It has to do with what makes BUSINESS sense.

Attacking me because you THINK that is the only thing that matters in this job is the line you can hold, just shows how shallow you are. It's also another example of the overarching selfishness of the typical AA senior f/a. "I had to put up with crap when I was junior so you do to." God forbid, that any of us should try to improve the conditions for those that come after us. That could not possibly be what a union is for. We only care about the benefits and work rules of those who have at least 20 years. 20-40 years in an entry level job. Mother must be so proud.

Taking 6 months off for family matters is a specious argument to use in support of people who just refuse to work. And, don't try to kid me. You did not take this job for the flexibility. Admit it, you didn't even know about the flexibility when you took it. You have to be around awhile to learn how to scam the system.

 

[kirkpatrick]

People have provided arguments here for the flexibility, but you are still envious of the trips you want and can't have.

I agree completely. Flexibility is the name of the game. We ran into this same problem at TWA when the company shrank, we didn't hire anyone and seniority started to go through the roof. A movement arose to cripple the system in an attempt to coerce "senioritas" to quit. It didn't work. They won't quit. Even if they did away with the whole OE system tomorrow, the number who would quit wouldn't be enough to make an appreciable difference.

Growth and hiring are the only things that will help. It's already happening at LGA where we will have about 250 recalls when the next group goes on line on the 18th. People have been pushed out to other bases and pushed up off reserve. BOS and DCA have significant numbers of recalls as well.

MK

 

[jimntx]

MK, the recalls don't have as much to do with growth as you think. They also have to do with trying to cover trips that "active" f/as won't fly. Yes, SLT is "growing" also if you look at the f/a roster. However, the number of lines on our bid sheet is now 30% less than it was when I was recalled in Nov. 2004. From what friends at other bases are saying, the same thing is happening at those bases as well. Adding people willing to work to the payroll is not growth. And, as I said, more and more flying is being given to Eagle.

Do we all think this can go on indefinitely? Look at the thread about Schedule Changes for 2008. Look at how many of the "new flying" entries are Eagle trips.

But then, I'm just a junior f/a. What do I know? I can't fly the trips that allow me to hear the really good galley gossip that is always accurate.

 

[jersey777]

You don't have a clue why I keep mentioning this subject. It has absolutely nothing to do with the trips I can or can not hold. I'm holding 22 hour layovers in ABQ--one of my favorites--this month. It has to do with what make BUSINESS sense.

Taking 6 months off for family matters is a specious argument to use in support of people who just refuse to work. And, don't try to kid me. You did not take this job for the flexibility. Admit it, you didn't even know about the flexibility when you took it. You have to be around awhile to learn how to scam the system.

Since when do we negotiate contracts on what makes business sense for the company? The old saying of "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate." couldn't be more true. Everything in our contract was fought for tooth and nail. We didn't even have ANY kind of retirement plan until the 70's. So don't come waltz in here with your management background and mentality and start thinking you know better. It is becoming clear to me why you have such distain for the union..with your comments about being perpetually trip removed. They probably have had enough of you. I have to.

 

[kirkpatrick]

MK, the recalls don't have as much to do with growth as you think.

I didn't mean to imply that the recalls had anything to do with growth at all. They don't. The recalls are due to attrition, with will top 600 for 2007.

They also have to do with trying to cover trips that "active" f/as won't fly.

How? An OE trip isn't an opening unless the person OEing the trip calls in sick if it isn't taken, and that much sick leave abuse would certainly bring attention to the person calling in.

And, as I said, more and more flying is being given to Eagle.

How can Eagle be growing when they haven't taken delivery of a new aircraft in three years and have no new aircraft on order? In fact, the size of mainline AA has remained remarkably stable recently, and plans for 2008 call for essentially no change in block hours flown.

MK

 

[jimntx]

Well, I guess I'm just imagining that a lot of the STL flying that used to be mainline is now AE and AX. As is a great deal of the Mexico flying out of DFW. And, as I said, go look at the thread entitled Schedule Changes for Summer 2008. Most of the posts seem to be about new routes that are being flown by CRJ or ERJ. Last I checked we don't fly those on mainline.

 

[AAStew]

No Jim, I can see past the end of my line, thank you. You don't seem to get it do you? If it weren't for these Mama's who drop everything, you would not be working here. The trips are covered, they don't keep their benefits, and excuse me have you tried non-revving anywhere lately? I non-revved for the first time in 2007 the other day. I usually buy my tickets, on JetBlue, SW, or AA if they can match their fare. Most Senior Mama's I know who can AFFORD to take the time off buy their tickets also. They also do not take our insurance because they are covered elsewhere.
And for your information I am not a Senior Mama, I am on reserve at almost every base in the system with 16 years seniority. So you would think I would be holding a grudge! I don't know you beyond your posts here, but I don't like you. You are an arrogant person who can't appreciate what is there and why. Obviously the Flight Attendant job is not meant for you, please try to move within the company, since you know so much perhaps working in scheduling would be more your style. Then you can tell the schedulers who have been there for years how they are not working efficiently enough.

 

[jimntx]

Oh, AASTEW doesn't like me. How shall I go on?

P.S. Obviously you are the one to judge whether or not I should be a flight attendant. I guess all those passengers who have written all those letters of commendation to the company about me (with not a single complaint letter in 6 years) should have consulted with you first. Fortunately, your opinion of me is not really any of my business; so, please keep it to yourself. I don't like to pry.

 

[AAStew]

Oh, AASTEW doesn't like me. How shall I go on?

P.S. Obviously you are the one to judge whether or not I should be a flight attendant. I guess all those passengers who have written all those letters of commendation to the company about me (with not a single complaint letter in 6 years) should have consulted with you first. Fortunately, your opinion of me is not really any of my business; so, please keep it to yourself. I don't like to pry.

I don't like you, I never have said you aren't a good flight attendant, obviously I can't judge that. You came into a company and a profession (if you can call it that) that was carved out by those ladies (and men) whom you believe should leave. They have earned the right to drop every one of their effing trips until that last trip where they die in their jumpseat! Someone suggested you go into management, I agree with them. You should try flight service supervisor or attendance manager, you are a natural.

 

[kirkpatrick]

Well, I guess I'm just imagining that a lot of the STL flying that used to be mainline is now AE and AX.

For sure, a lot of former mainline out of STL is now AE/AX. Stuff is shifted back and forth all the time. But the overall amount of flying done by AA and AE has remained fairly stable.

MK

 

[Garfield1966]

I think there are numerous other costs involved with having people on payroll who do not fly. There is the cost involved with tracking them, not knowing what the manning will be, along with all the other unknowns of having people on payroll who may or may not fly.

If I were an employer I cannot see the benefit of having people on payroll who are not contributing anything to the bottom line. I do not understand how or why a company should be forced to operate that way.

 

[IORFA]

While we are talking about ‘penalties’. How about penalties for calling in less than 2 hours out?



This only works, if I get in LESS trouble for calling in sick early. I for one will NOT call in sick untill 2 hours or less before DEPARTURE. Why, you ask? For that simple reason. I get in no more trouble and AA can't give a reserve a short callout. That is why standby's are scheduled. Kinda sucks, but at least my illness doesn't screw with someone else.

 

[FA Mikey]

Then you screw the reserve person. The penalty is to the reserve who gets the 2 hour call out then, or the standby at the end of the shift getting in to the mind set of going home. It doesnt phase a scheduler, they do a couple of key strokes and call the next person on the list.

Maybe its just me, but the more time I could have before a trip the easier it is to deal with. I could take the worst trip loaded the night before and come in with a good mind set over getting called out 2 hours before, having to rush around and getting to the planes minutes before departure and then checking EQ and setting up a galley.

If I call in sick, its the day before and before reserve assignments are loaded.

 

[kirkpatrick]

I think there are numerous other costs involved with having people on payroll who do not fly. There is the cost involved with tracking them, not knowing what the manning will be, along with all the other unknowns of having people on payroll who may or may not fly.

A person who bids a line and then OE's all their trips doesn't accrue sick leave or vacation and has to pay their medical benefits. Someone picks up the trips, so what sort of "tracking" and unknown "manning" problems are there? The trips are covered by the picker-upper with no input or involvement by anyone except the FA's making the exchange. Often the person OEing the trip is top of scale and the person picking it up is more junior, making less money. That has to be figured in.

If I were an employer I cannot see the benefit of having people on payroll who are not contributing anything to the bottom line. I do not understand how or why a company should be forced to operate that way.

It's called a contract, which the company and union agreed to. If you pick apart any job you can find something that appears to be unproductive, but it's the bottom line that counts. Flexibility is one of the main things FA's (and pilots) like about their jobs. Any flexibility item that costs money was considered when the union and company negotiated the contract.

 

[jimntx]

I posted the original just because the board had gotten boring. The usual yah-yah about excutive bonusses vs. our pay cuts which happened almost 5 years ago. Yeah, I know. It's not fair. News Flash: Life is not fair. There ain't no free lunch. And, nothing's going to come in the mail.

Whether or not I believe what I posted, it is interesting to me how vitriolic some of you got toward me personally--not against the ideas expressed. And, BTW, you need to start thinking in terms of your arguments against these ideas. Simply attacking the company negotiator like you attacked me won't work. They REALLY don't care what you think of them.

Also, the depth of the vitriol is a clear indication that somewhere down inside, you know I am right. You know that these are weaknesses in the system. And, you are scared to death when someone says this stuff out loud because you know there is no real defense for any of it, and you are afraid that the company will stop these scams before you get enough seniority to use them.

For future reference...Ad hominem arguments are the weakest. In fact, are not allowed in intellectual debate and discussion. They are the adult version of "You stink." "No, you stink." "Well, you stink twice as much."

Second weakest...It's always been that way. Try to say with a straight face to someone who has a real job, "Yes, I think that if someone has hung around for 40 years, your company should keep a desk and a parking space for that person whether or not they ever come to work. They earned the right not to come to work. And, beside that, they might decide to come to work some day."