F/A Furlough

[Skymess]

The flaw in your logic is that furlough pay is paying people to not work. The purpose of furlough pay--which is a maximum of 2 month's base salary--is to discourage the company from furloughing people. If it costs them money to furlough you, they think twice about it.

Because we gave up furlough pay--which we will never get back--we have opened ourselves and our fellow union members to seasonal furloughs. Something other airlines and companies in other industries have done in the past. And it doesn't matter who did it. The fact that it was done is wrong. As it is I am only a little over 900 from the bottom of the active list. If all 410 are furloughed, I will be only about 500 from the bottom of the active list.

In real unions, all of the members are concerned about the welfare of all other members. In the APFA, if it doesn't affect people at your seniority or above, it is not an issue. And, when some of you slip back onto reserve because people junior to you in your base have been furloughed, I hope you will keep your moaning about your sad lot in life in check. Not caring about whether other people are furloughed means not caring about being on reserve. You can't have it both ways.

Besides I haven't noticed any of you being concerned before now about being on reserve or availability and not flying. In December and this month (I bid onto reserve in February), I did not even fly one month's guarantee. In the two months the sum of my GTD was 87 hours, but that included 15 hours of airport standby and 4.10 of special assignment credit. And, it wouldn't have been that high if I hadn't put myself on short call one day and managed to pick up a high time 3-day. I was talking to some DFW f/as yesterday. One of them said that the DFW-D reserves were flying an average of 35 hours/month. The bases where the furloughs will occur are not the bases where the serious overages exist.

We are already paying people to not fly. Furlough pay for 410 people would be a drop in the bucket.

While we are at it, you know I'm not one to say I told you so; semicolon however comma...

I said back in January that I thought the overage was more like 1000-1500, and you all told me I didn't know what I was talking about--that if the union and the company said 420, then 420 it is. Well, we mitigated those 420 furloughs in January with leaves and partnership flying, then almost 600 additional f/as went back out on leave 01FEB, and now we have an overage of 410. Let's see, 420+600+410 = 1430. I believe that falls between 1000 and 1500. As I said, it's a good thing that I'm not the type to say I told you so.

Come on Jim, really? You seriously believe that all of this doesn't effect EVERY seniority and that I'm not junior just because I'm a little senior to you? There are people flying 30 years who hold good stuff who are feeling the crunch. We're all in it together. The only difference is the senior person isn't going to get canned.

Furlough pay is a dead issue. Let it go. It's been gone for years. It's not coming back. It was shortsighted to give it up but I can understand how it was done. Who knew that 9/11 would happen and we would furlough in record numbers? Who knew?

We all knew the overage was more than they said based on the fact that we're all hurting for trips and trip trading has been at a virtual standstill for the past 3 months. I do people's schedules and it has been pretty difficult piecing things together. People who only flew primo trips before have had to get used to flying just about anything to make a buck.

P.S. I've been on reserve for the last two months; January and February. I'm at the end of my rope with them swinging me around. The endless makeup process has meant EVERY one of my trips has been 2-4 hours before departure. Not pretty when you have one month of reserve. 2 months is torture. I'm a stressed out mess. (a bigger mess than usual )I must've lost about 12 pounds.

 

[nyc6035]

Well, while I'm monopolizing the bottom of the thread, I may as well post this. I emailed the contract department at the union about my question of the 60-day WARN act threshhold. (Though it's not contractual, the contract department also keeps track of legal obligations of the union and the company.)

Because the number to be furloughed is less than 500, the WARN act does not apply. I'm assuming that there is a similar threshhold with the New York law as well. It does not apply at all if the number to be laid off is less than 50. It applies for furloughs of 50-499 only if the number represents at least 30% of the affected workforce. 410 is only about 2% of the total "active" f/a workforce at AA.

Which really gives me pause. Look for a furlough announcement of another 400-499 f/as later on. My money is on the end of summer. In fact, considering the number of f/as who will be coming back on line this Spring and Summer from current LOAs, I would not be surprised if there is more than one additional announcement of 400-500 fa/s furloughed before the end of this year. I think the company has found a way to maximize their use of furloughs without running afoul of messy, intrusive things like the WARN act.

That's why they call me Little Mary Sunshine. When things look blackest, I'm always there with the voice of doom.

I just looked at the "letter" of the law for NY...and a coulple of interesting things: Here's the actual text:

4. "Mass layoff" means a reduction in force which: (a) is not the result of a plant closing; and
( b ) results in an employment loss at a single site of employment
during any thirty-day period for:
(i) at least thirty-three percent of the employees (excluding parttime
employees); and
(ii) at least twenty-five employees (excluding part-time employees);
or
(iii) at least two hundred fifty employees (excluding part-time
employees).

If I read the posts above correctly LGA is loosing 249 FAs....incredibly 1 below the (iii) clause to invoke the 90 day notice period. This 250 threshold 'resets' every 30 days...so you could imply that for May 1 another 249 in NY could be discharged.

It would be interesting to make note if any other AMR employees are layed off in any job classes during this period inside NY. If so, they may have outsmarted themselves and a complaint could certainly be filed with the state. As I read it backpay and benefits costs would be due to the employees effected for the 90 period.

 

[Royal Ambassador]

(iii) at least two hundred fifty employees (excluding part-time
employees).

If I read the posts above correctly LGA is loosing 249 FAs....incredibly 1 below the (iii) clause to invoke the 90 day notice period.

There are also 6 getting the furlough notice at JFK. That makes for a total of 255 in New York City. If AA takes the position that LGA and JFK are not a single site, why does the company consider them to be co-terminals along with EWR? Many LGA sequences originate and terminate at JFK.

 

[L1011Ret]

The flaw in your logic is that there are too many of us. We're all sitting around on reserve watching the phone and there are no trips. People who have lines are stealing trips from each other and trolling through the bulletin board to snatch ANYTHING that anyone is dropping.

Why pay people not to work?

Rewarding management with bonuses when you're company is doing poorly is also wrong. One doesn't beget right through two wrongs.

I agre with Butch that the whole argument still raging between TWA and AA is really not helping ANY flight attendant. Whether or not any of the 2 groups despise each other, everyone still has to agree that the way the furloughs have been jerked around by the company and the APFA is despicably unsconscionable.

Now if you really want to know how good APFA is, you should read the the RPA briefs where APFA so wanted to get rid of Carty they traded him for much better possibilities in pay and furlough.

 

[nbmcg01]

The flaw in your logic is that there are too many of us. We're all sitting around on reserve watching the phone and there are no trips. People who have lines are stealing trips from each other and trolling through the bulletin board to snatch ANYTHING that anyone is dropping.

Why pay people not to work?

Rewarding management with bonuses when you're company is doing poorly is also wrong. One doesn't beget right through two wrongs.

I agre with Butch that the whole argument still raging between TWA and AA is really not helping ANY flight attendant. Whether or not any of the 2 groups despise each other, everyone still has to agree that the way the furloughs have been jerked around by the company and the APFA is despicably unsconscionable.

You have just addressed the irony of this plight. The two groups DON'T despise each other. Both have been equally complimentary about working together. Those recalled have been warmly welcomed back by everyone BUT the APFA. Wouldn't you like to have been a bug on the wall when the Company offered extended recall rights? Somehow I think the Company was happier than the Union.

If I were the Union President, I would have a few sleepless nights thinking about negotiating with so many disenfranchized members. And that is from ALL sides of the fence. I have never seen such lack of support.
(and that includes the IAM..lol)

 

[nyc6035]

There are also 6 getting the furlough notice at JFK. That makes for a total of 255 in New York City. If AA takes the position that LGA and JFK are not a single site, why does the company consider them to be co-terminals along with EWR? Many LGA sequences originate and terminate at JFK.

Royal,

Excellent point. I missed JFK in my review of the airports impacted. I think FAs in NY should point this out to the union AND file a complaint with the state. The company may be able to keep you on property for 90 days before the warn is effective...but at least in this environment it's a little time to plan.

 

[Skymess]

You have just addressed the irony of this plight. The two groups DON'T despise each other. Both have been equally complimentary about working together. Those recalled have been warmly welcomed back by everyone BUT the APFA. Wouldn't you like to have been a bug on the wall when the Company offered extended recall rights? Somehow I think the Company was happier than the Union.

If I were the Union President, I would have a few sleepless nights thinking about negotiating with so many disenfranchized members. And that is from ALL sides of the fence. I have never seen such lack of support.
(and that includes the IAM..lol)

Kind of funny that they announce a recall extension on the same day that the furlough is announced, eh? Now you know that they knew what was coming all along.

The lack of support stems from our union working with the company to hose us and wasting our money on dumb slogans and bag tags. The only useful things that came about in the union during this and the last administration was 8 hours BEHIND the door and jumpseat on other airlines. Those are great things but don't really add much to my bottom dollar.

 

[Royal Ambassador]

I think FAs in NY should point this out to the union AND file a complaint with the state.

Do you really think that this union is going to fight for the plight of the former TWA flight attendants other than negotiating a placebo in the form of a worthless recall extension? What are the chances that 1,500 are going to be recalled between now and November 2011?

Besides, the APFA is aware of this issue and claims that its lawyers are studying it. Fortunately, the New York law offers a self help alternative to the impacted employees and substantial monetary penalties to violators.

Dear Member,

Because Laura is in transit I was asked to thank you for your e-mail and respond to you.

Yes, APFA’s legal counsel is aware of and are addressing the WARN Act differences as they apply to NY flight attendants. They are awaiting a further legal response to their questions. Please continue to check the APFA website for updated information or e-mail [email protected] That is where we will publish current information. Also, your base Chair and Vice Chair is another valuable local resource.

In Unity,

Kitty Solder

 

[BigBangTheory]

If all of you are so po'd at the APFA, than get a petition going to have a new union.

 

[Royal Ambassador]

If all of you are so po'd at the APFA, than get a petition going to have a new union.

No need to go through that hassle. It is far easier to get rid of the union by showing that it breached its duty to fairly represent the interests of all of the members.

Here is an example from the APFA weekly HotLine update for Friday, February 27, 2009.

NOTE TO RESERVES WITH VOLUNTEER TO FLY (VTF) ASSIGNMENTS

For those Reserve Flight Attendants who receive a VTF assignment under the test program (whether an actual sequence or the 4-hour minimum), the additional pay will not be reflected on your HI1 as "above the guarantee." However, as long as the the sequence flown is coded "RU," or the 4-hour minimum VTF pay (if applicable) is indicated, the correct pay calculation should take place. (Please note that when the 4-hour minimum applies, it may take up to a week to be reflected on your HI1). As with other incentive pay, the VTF hours above Reserve guarantee will be paid in the final paycheck of the subsequent month. Please check your ePays statement carefully if you are due this payment.

Only a few weeks remain in the Volunteer to Fly (VTF) trial being conducted at the bases of DFW, IDF, DCA and DCA-I. The data gathered from the 60-day test will allow your Negotiating Team to examine its potential impact on both reserve numbers and the ability to earn extra pay for Line Holders and Reserves alike. Important information on the program for Flight Attendants at the test bases is available through the APFA website. Go to the Negotiations page and view, download or print the VTF documents linked to at the very top of the page.

The BOD and the national officers do not seem to be concerned with experiment's impact on manpower needs and future furloughs or recalls.

 

[Kev3188]

Better to have TWA furlough fodder than nAAtive furlough fodder. Why doesn't AA offer 5 and 5? If they offered it many would leave.

What's 5 and 5?

 

[Maark767]

Kind of funny that they announce a recall extension on the same day that the furlough is announced, eh? Now you know that they knew what was coming all along.

The lack of support stems from our union working with the company to hose us and wasting our money on dumb slogans and bag tags. The only useful things that came about in the union during this and the last administration was 8 hours BEHIND the door and jumpseat on other airlines. Those are great things but don't really add much to my bottom dollar.

Hey ... You dog the union every chance you get...But dont forget that APFA protected your senority otherwise you'd be getting furloughed on 01Apr09. Also the union cant just go into management and demand things be changed overnight....You'll see for the first time that it takes a long time to get what we want....
We had bag tags and slogans in 1993 that brought us all together .... That togetherness got us an industry leading contract after an indusrty leading strike..

 

[jimntx]

I think it means add 5 years to the employee's age and 5 years to their length of service to get them to retire. This would have minimal to no benefit to most flight attendants. According to last October's updated seniority list, there are 2619 f/as who will have 30 years of seniority (or more) by the end of 2009. The ones who have 30+ (there are 555 who have 40 or more years) are perfectly happy in their work, and probably have no desire to retire.

Assuming that those with 30+ started right out of college (AA never hired less than age 19 or 20), 5 years would just barely make them eligible for early retirement (age 55). Why not just work until the actual age 55?
This is not the economy to be out looking for a job if one does not have to be looking.

Anyone with less than 30 years, 5&5 would still not put many of them in the eligible range for retirement.

If aafsc was referring to the former TW f/as currently on the payroll, he needs to remember that they were given full credit for their TW years for payroll and pension service purposes. If 5 years made any difference to them, they would already be retired.

The f/a pension is so relatively small that most f/as can not afford to retire until they are also eligible for full Social Security. For a lot of us that age has already receded to 66, and for some currently on the payroll it's even higher.

 

[aafsc]

What's 5 and 5?

Adding 5 years to your age and 5 years to your seniority. AA did this in the 1990s and some of the ramp people took it. Today, due to the industry environment and all the associated BS that goes with it, a substantial number of qualifying ramp employees say they will take it if offered; and we do have some high seniority at AA (nAAtive and TWA; especially TWA in STL). The VBRs and SIS that were recently offered were successful in enticing many to take early retirement. Given the current atmosphere of the work environment, I think it is safe to say that 5 and 5 will entice more to retire in greater numbers than when the VBRs and the SIS were offered. 5 and 5 will put many who are currently under retirement age at or over it while those who are still at AA and at or over retirement age will benefit as well.

In response to jmntx: I don't know how many F/As would take a 5 and 5 but I disagree with you; some will indeed take it; maybe some of the former TWA F/As since they are on the bottom of the list and get the most undesirable trips and bases; although I don't know how much money five years would give them. Since it is apparent that AA won't be hiring F/As for a loooooooong time, these F/As who started with TWA in the 1960s, 70s and 80s will be on the bottom for a long time to come, maybe they would just decide it is not worth the trouble any more and say the heck with it and take the 5 and 5 in addition to how much time they have flying with AA with the retiree medical and retire. Many, like nbmcq, have retired from furlough with benefits and were not enticed by a VBR or 5 and 5.

 

[aafsc]

My My My, what a hypocrite you are. :down:

How am I being hypocritical?