F/a Sick Calls And No Contacts

[MarkMyWords]

Oh boy.....where to start......

USAirBoy -

I agree that in circumstances such as this, there should be a exemption to the ITD rules and scheudling should have the ability to call out a domestic reserve f/a to cover the trip. As for the issue of taking the air taxi, I understand the fear and if that was the case, I would agree. The 2 f/a's in CLT never mentioned a fear of flying on small planes. They accepted the trip, then 30-45 minutes later, called back and called off sick.

My Darling PitBull -

We have had discussion before about sick time abuses and unfair sick policies. This is a classic example of where ACTIVE, ON DUTY reserve f/a's did not want to work and either did not answer the phone/pager or called off sick. These are people that are abviously not to worryed about dependability or the sick penalty. I agreed with you in the past that I think that the sick policy is unfair. It is a knee jerk reaction policy that penalizes everyone because of people like that above mentioned 8 people that refused to work. You are always advocating the plight of the flight attendants, and I do applaude you for your efforts on behalf of the individuals that are truly being penalized unnecessarily. But what about those that abuse the system? They are the root cause of the changes in policy. They are the ones that are the most costly. How as a Union and as a Company do you deal with those individuals? When the company tries to enforce current policies and take disciplinary action against them, then the union comes to their defense. At what point would the union agree that there is a problem and not defend the actions of the indiviuals that are abusing the system adn causing the majority of the problems?

I can assure you that none of the flight attendants that were called were off duty. All of them were ACTIVE - ON DUTY RESERVES! You asked why every call is scrutinized and magnified 10 fold, I will ask why not? Why not challenge years of sick call abuse? So we let it go unchecked until when? Never? You're claim that staffing levels have been cut to the bone, may be true in some respect, but what would you consider the appropriate staffing level? In this scenario we had a 50% failure rate in contacting AVAILABLE reserves to fill the positions open. So should we increase our reserve staffing levels by 100% to compensate for those that only want to work when and if they want to? Or would the better plan be to eliminate the dead weight? You asked why we only had 10 ITD reserves in PHL and claiming that were are so short. I think you are missing the point. We had 10 available, we needed 8 and could only get 4! In your view, should we have had 20, 30 available? WE didn't have this problem a year ago, because the numbers were bloated! How many f/a's should we have at the end of the month that don't break guarantee? Also, these flight attendants that were called out were assigned the trip because it was a quick call situation.

You made the statement: "I don't know what department you work, but I don't believe it is the f/a department so you couldn't possibly know the intricate, delicate work of scheduling flights. If U had more staffing they wouldn't have had to get a plane to fly that new crew over there. We didn't have these problems in this magnitude before AND I HAVE BEEN ON THIS PROPERTY LONGER THAN YOU." Let me just say that I an well aware of that it takes to schedule flights and crews. I am more knowledgable about this area then you will ever be. I may not kow every in and out of every contract, but I am more versed in the operation of the airline then you will ever be. I see crap like what I mentioned above happen EVERY SINGLE DAY! Crew members being called out to work and refusing legal trips, calling in sick, UTC's, etc. I have seen these types of scenarios in my personal life as well as in my business dealings. I have a better grip on what REALLY goes on then you think. You can come on here and blow smoke all you want, I KNOW BETTER. Again, I do not want to belittle the fact that there are legitimate sick calls and UTC's, but to have to contact 16 employees to cover 8 positions is unacceptable and sheds light to the fact that this is not just a small problem.

You mentioned something about people that are being furloughed in Dec being disgusted with the company and their mental health isn't good. I am sure that may be the case. I have been there many times myself and it is a stressful situation. But how many of the Reserves in the PHL ITD are set to be furloughted in Dec? Since ITD is one of the most senior divisions for flight attendants, I would care to venture very few to none. I think PSA1979 hit the nail right on the head. please go back and read her/his post. He/she has a much better understanding for the reality of the situation.

I don't believe that the company needs to hire behavioral industrial psychologists, they need to make examples of the people that don't wnat to work. They need to stop the abuses of the system. This is a job. When you are called to work, you should be expected to work. This isn't something that you do when and if you feel like it and many of your co-workers have that attitude.

Cavalier -

I agree with you in part that this management team is trying to instill fear in SOME of the employees. Those that should fear the most are those that are doing something wrong! If you are an employee that comes to work, do what is expected of you then you, have nothing to fear. If you are abusing your sick time or not answering your phone when scheduling calls, then I would worry.


Cav you said: Your example makes it seem people owe their very lives to this company, people are supposed to drop to their knees and ask how high to jump any time management beckons."

I say that the employees owe their livelyhood to the company that pays their salary. If you are an ITD reserve, you know the hazards of being on reserve. To have had a drink while on duty is inexcuseable. To call off sick because you are not in base ( of that is the case ) is inexcuseable. To call in sick because you don't want to work - inexcuseable. As a reserve you know what days you are expected to be in base and avbailable to work. You know that the company can call you at anytime and assign you a trip. YOU, as an employee, are being asked to DO YOUR JOB! If you do not wnat to do your job, then step aside and let someone that really wants to work come back. The company is not here for you to come to work when you feel like it.

I do sympathize with the plight of many of the employees, but I also realize that there are times that the company is right. No, I do not agree with the sick penalty, but I do agree with disposing of employees that abuse the system and make life worse for everyone else. It is because of the minority of people that abused the previous sick policy that there were changes made. So now the majority of employees suffer as a consequence. What makes more sense, punish the minority and fire them if they don't change their work habits, or make everyone pay for their abuses? I would rather see the inept get fired and eliminate the sick penalty, but if you prefer to protect the minority, that is your business.

 

[MarkMyWords]

Shirley -

Things like this happen quite often. Reserves show available and when you call to assign them a trip, the crew member either sicks the trip right away, or accepts the trip and turns around and calls in sick shortly their after. This happens with both Pilots and Flight Attendants. While the vast majority of crew members do what is expected of them and are there when you need them, there are still those that do not. When you are reserve you are expected to be in base and available to be at the ATO in 90 minutes. If you ever get an opportunity to talk to a crew scheduler, they could tell you stories that would make your eyes bug out.

As for how much of the 12 hour delay could be attributed to the crew issue, 3 hours. There was an aircraft ready to go at 3am, but the charter with the crews didn't get into PHL until around 5am. Had the PHL F/A's been there, we would have departed at 3am. Had the CLT F/A's not sicked the trip we would have left at 4am. The CLT F/A's were called at midnight, if the charter left at 0130 they would have been in at 0330. Instead they waited 30-45 min and called in sick which meant that we had to call out 2 additional F/A's and allow them the 90 minute call out.

 

[PITbull]

Mark,

You speak from both sides of your mouth......

One breath you say you sympathise with the plight of the flight attendants, in the next breath you "slam them all to kingdom come", and have the audacity to sit there and tell others on this board that it is "common place" that occurs with sicking a trip by both f/as and pilots. By your mere remarks it can not be true, otherwise YOU WOULD NEED MUCH MORE STAFFING TO COVER THE TRIPS, YOU WHO KNOWS SO MUCH MORE THAN ME OR ANYONE REGARDING SCHEDULING AND STAFFING, and you sit there and are less than "forthright" in telling me repeatedly that you are NOT friggen management! Oh, yea, you have these so called friends that tell you everything that is so negative about our group... yea right, and then all of sudden you have access to what? Look it up with such accuracy that YOU allege to make your point?

Sorry Charlie, I don't buy into the crap (as you call it). I live, eat and drink the f/a group I know everything that goes on everywewhere in the system. You catch'en this drift over here.

You STILL did not answer the question on WHY there are only 10 Reserves available in the beginning of the month for the biggest base in the system????

You think you can allude the direct questions, and you may succeed in diverting and exaggerating your way with some posters on here who just have no clue. BUT, my dear friend with all due respect to you and your efforts to remain on this board and convince the masses for the sake of protecting this mangement, YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO CONVINCE ME AS I AM IN THE FRONTLINE WITH THE TROOPS IN THE TRENCHES TRYING TO DODGE THE ARTERLLERY FLYING THROUGH THE AIR!Those f/as who are habitual abusers don't remain on the property. There existence is short here. There are those that have worked for U for years, and find them selves some rare occasions in their lives that they have a difficult time jungling work and family and at times can't seem to separate the two because of the NATURE of our professions of leaving home every single week, every single month every single year until we retire, IF WE MAKE THERE!

Those are the folks I defend on this board! And in my real life, sir.

If you want to spend your time on these board trying to convince some on here HOW abusive f/as and pilots are (cause you have this "in" on kowing) you will never convince those who DO KNOW. From what you have been posting today YOU AND THIS MANGEMENT HAVE NOT FIGURED OUT A WAY TO MAKE POLICY THAT PROTECTS THOSE WHO NEVER ABUSE or rarely find themselves in a situation to have this kind of heavy handed discipline. YOU and this mangement figure "hey lets beat them all up" and see who we have left, then we know for sure we got the minority of abusers. That type of thinking, sir, and implication is why U is circling the drain.... STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR MANGEMENT INABILITY TO MANAGE THE EMPLOYEES WITH POSITIVE POLICIES THAT INSPIRE FOLKS TO WANT TO BE HERE AND DO A GOOD JOB FOR PRIDE SAKE, AND FOR THE CUSTOMERS THEY CARE about.

Sometimes, I can't believe what comes out of you. Reread your post again. I gather and conclude you don't give a damn about the employees really, you can't wait to throw as many under the bus. You rather take them all, to get to the few; The very few. It's like burning your entire garden and the entire forest just to get rid of a few rodents that eat your garden.

Make up your mind Mark, how you really feel about us. You say, that most f/as do an excellent job, but its those few that ruin it. Meanwhile you say to "shirlyque" poster that it happens quite often.

Well, that means, we rarely get flights out. Right? Cause U eliminated 5,400 of us in one year and half, and hell, all f/as just call in sick cause they just don't want to work. hell, they would rather starve, lose everything they have and just wait to get terminated. right? ..yea, that's how we are... Hell, we are not really suffering, we're just faking it right, Mark? For some unknown reason not known to "man kind".

I guess all those cancellations, somehow, you will find a way to blame the flight crews....listening to those so called airline friends you have? I think you have been sitting with mangement for too long, my friend. Get up from behind the desk and go to the union presidents in PHL and PIT. They will express to you what is really happening cause they don't drink to damn "kool-aide".

If you really had an interest in fixing any of the problems associated with sick, you would find other ways to manage the problems than the "heavy handed" manner that is presently taking place; as if that is the right and true answer to anything.

 

[PSA1979]

I think Pitbull puts as much "spin" on what is going on as "management". Pitbull states that PHL is the largest base with 2400 f/a's and they are so short of reserves. Yes, part of that is true, but what she doesn't say is that PHW (the International base in PHL) is only a small portion of that. Approx. 700 out of the 2400. And this abuse of the reserve system has been going on for years. Ask anyone in scheduling and they will tell you of the nightmares of trying to get a whole crew to show up at night when the International flights cancel for any reason. There may have been only 10 reserves available on the 12th, but that doesn't necessarily mean they were out of reserves.
There are only 11 flights a day out of PHL that go across the Atlantic. It would be a lot easier and cost effective if the fence was down between domestic and transatlantic, but AFA has been fighting against doing that for a long time. It would cost the high time very, very senior f/a's money to only be allowed to fly 105 hours instead of 122 (Vacation and FCO trips) and this would cost their retirement to be reduced. I'm sure the company would love to utilize domestic reserves for the ITD it would save a bundle, but it is in our contract and that is not one of the cost saving measures that AFA was willing to give back.
Being out of base and calling in sick on assignment when not really sick is a chronic problem that needs to be addressed. And this new sick policy only makes it worse as the people that are really sick don't want to call and get penalized if they aren't going to get used! How can we fix the situation? I don't know, I only know that I am going back to domestic, because I don't want to be on reserve after 25 years of flying.

 

[PITbull]

Oh and one more thing Mark, just in case you, who claim to know so much about our jobs, BUT still is not management, Management set down new ground rules for In-flight Department that ALL FLIGHT ATTENDANT DISCIPLINES WILL BE GRANTED ACROSS THE BOARD WITH CONSISTENCY. Everyone is treated exactly the same..... whether you have had a great record for years and years and years and find yourself in someone's cross hair for a few months in your carerr that you can't jungle whether it be illness (your own), family situation, etc.

Just as an FYI in case this "tid bit" slipped your "I'm- God-today-and- all -judging" mind.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

All that stuff about "not really being sick" is silly. If you're called in the middle of the night, awakened from a dead sleep which you probably only began an hour or two ago, then told that you would have to be on duty for up to 15 hours (after reporting for work, which could be a couple hours yet), I would think that a lot of folks wouldn't be up to it. I don't know just what the answer is, but if someone doesn't feel fit for duty then calling in sick is the right thing to do. You don't have to have the bubonic plague in order to not be fit for duty. I know sometimes when scheduling has called to awaken me in the middle of the night I haven't really been able to assess my physical condition for an hour or two. I don't think that I would assume that these people were doing anything other than what is expected of them; showing up for work in condition to perform up to standards (no matter how low management has made them in order to suit their goals), or call in sick. We're not an airline of 20 year olds that can stay up all night all weekend long and still function on monday.

 

[PITbull]

Hey PSA,

That's why you are no longer in office, because you were clueless then and still are. You state "calling off sick on assignment is a chronic problem that needs to be addressed"....where have YOU been sister....drinking more than managment kool-aide no doubt.

AFA tried to take down the fence in the summer negotiations. MANAGEMENT SAID NO! Before you talk about "spin" get your information correct for a change before you start shooting at the mouth.

Ask Carol. She was there and she is ITD!

Heard you are trying to get a management job? Any truth to that?

 

[MarkMyWords]

Ah, I just knew I could get Vesuvius to blow her top today.

Maybe I didn't make my point to Shirley clear enough. The point is that on a daily basis we have to deal with SOA (sick on Assignment) and UTC issues. Is it a matter of 10-15% of the crew members doing it? No. Does it happen 1-2-3 times a day, yes. If Crew Scheduling had an open 733 trip right this minute, how many phone calls would it take to fill the 3 open positions? In my thinking it should be only 3. If it is a quick call situation, then we should be able to call the 3 most junior ( and legal) f/a's and assign them the trip. End of story. Instead it can take 4-5-6 calls to cover the positions. It will all depend on who answers the phone, who says they are sick, who waits their 10-15 minutes to call back, etc. What is acceptable? In your line of thinking it is OK if we have 30 available reserves and have to call everyone of them to see who wants to work. Bull. You are on duty, legal and available, trips yours.

I do sympathize with the majority of the f/a's. I think the sick policy that you have is unfair and have advocated changing it. I feel bad that the majority have to pay the consequences for the "few" that abuse the system. That runs from sick calls to FMLA and everything in between. I am not slamming the entire work group because I do feel that the vast majority are good employees. They come to work and give it 110%. That is why they get such praises from people like Bob and Art. And I do think that the "few" are also good at their jobs, if you can get them to come to work!

For the 9 millionth time, I am not management. Why don't you spend less time attacking me and start attacking the problem from a Union stand point. When was the last time that you had an employee fired for attendance or dependability and refused to go to bat for them because they are WRONG? Instead you will pick up the sword and fight to keep this person employed. You help to cause the idiot policies that the company puts in place by protecting the dead weight. If sick time abuse was not an issue, would there be a need for this idiotic sick policy? No.

You asked why there were only 10 ITD reserves. I asked how many should there be? If we needed to replace an entire crew for our largest airplane, the most we would need is 8 flight attendants. How many more do we need sitting on reserve? 10 ACTIVE, ON DUTY, AVAILABLE, LEGAL reserves should have been enough. Would you prefer we had 20? 30? And why not address the issue of 4 sick calls, 3 UTC's and 1 who claimed to have been drinking - WHILE ON DUTY!

I am talking about people that abuse the system, not just once or twice, but over and over. Those that are out of base when they are supposed to be on duty. People that commute in on a flight and allow only 30 minutes before their check-in and when the flight is delayed, call in sick. This is not a problem with every single person that commutes. The vast majority of crew members are responsible enough to leave themselves back-up options to get to base or come in the night before. They are the ones that are responsible and should soemthing happen one day and they find themselves in a jam, so be it. But the ones that make this a habbit need to be addressed.

You dare to sit there and tell me to stop making excuses for this management team and I will say I am not making excuses. I applaude their efforts to rid us of people that don't want to work and keep those employees that do. I woudl ask you to stop making excuses for the employees that abuse the system. Have you taken me to task on one single fact in what I have written? No. Why? Because I am sure that you have checked and seen that I am correct in what I have posted. So instead, let's throw up this smoke screen and dodge the issue of abuse! Lets scream and cry how unfair management is, how buried you are in the trenches fighting for just causes, how policies beat the working class to the floor, and so on. But let's not address the real issue......these people were WRONG and should be held accountable! You want this management team held accountable for every little thing. I agree. I believe that employees should be held accountable for their mistakes too. Make enough of them and you are out the door. I would expect the same for any executive of the company as well.

You said: "Cause U eliminated 5,400 of us in one year and half, and hell, all f/as just call in sick cause they just don't want to work. hell, they would rather starve, lose everything they have and just wait to get terminated. right? ..yea, that's how we are... Hell, we are not really suffering, we're just faking it right, Mark? For some unknown reason not known to "man kind"."

I say: Stop with the hysteria and emotional overlaod. Come down off the rafters. I never said all f/a's call off sick and I never said all f/a's don't want to work. You are the one that repeatedly claims that f/a's can't afford to call in sick. That they have to come to work on their death beds, exposeing customers and co-workers to their medical plights. Funny, the sick penalty didn't seem to have an effect on the 4 people that called in sick here did it? Funny how the UTC and dependability program had little or no effect on the fact that 3 people received UTC's. I think you missed your calling in the theater!

 

[PITbull]

Mark,

With the picture you painted above...you have just "slamed" the entire work group. There is no sympathy for the majority of the group from you, cause you just lumped everyone together just like the In-flight Dept I spoke of. You made my case way I see it. No beating about the bush, No doubt about it. Your message is "crystal clear" below:

"I am not slamming the entire work group because I do feel that the vast majority are good employees. They come to work and give it 110%. That is why they get such praises from people like Bob and Art. And I do think that the "few" are also good at their jobs, if you can get them to come to work!"

Blah, blah, blah....

I just wish that mangement responsibilities one day is to be "on duty" for a straight 15 years as a reserve mangement, and that they call you at wee hours of the morning and tell you to jump in the car ASAP, and you need to be on duty for the next 15 hours.

When you cite problems in the future make sure it is not the scenerio you gave as if it is "par".

ANSWER to the flight attendant reserve issue to cover the operation: HIRE MORE FLIGHT ATTENDANTS BACK!

You amazed me today.

 

[USAirBoyA330]

I had to pop some popcorn for this. The kitty litter is flying everywhere.

 

[MarkMyWords]

Oh and one more thing Mark, just in case you, who claim to know so much about our jobs, BUT still is not management, Management set down new ground rules for In-flight Department that ALL FLIGHT ATTENDANT DISCIPLINES WILL BE GRANTED ACROSS THE BOARD WITH CONSISTENCY. Everyone is treated exactly the same..... whether you have had a great record for years and years and years and find yourself in someone's cross hair for a few months in your carerr that you can't jungle whether it be illness (your own), family situation, etc.

Just as an FYI in case this "tid bit" slipped your "I'm- God-today-and- all -judging" mind.

Gee, would you want the company to apply policy inconsistently? OK, we are going to apply this to you so we can fire you , but it won't apply to her because she used to be such a good employee? That is just plain ridiculous.

Let's use the unable to commute scenario. I am a good f/a and always leave myself a back up flight and plan for bad weather and if need be, come in the day before for my trip. That is my responsibility because I chose to commute. Then last week on my way to the airport I had a flat tire. I missed my first flight and barely made the back-up flight. Now we taxi out and get a 30 minute hold due to PHL atc. Finally enroute, weather conditions worsen and the flight diverts. Now I won't make my trip. I call crew sched and tell them what happened. I am replaced on the trip and charged as unable to commute.

Next day I am contacted by my supervisor and told that I would be placed on an itial discussion because I was unable to get to work on time. This should not be a problem for me, since I am a good employee. This is an isolated incident.

Now let's say that you are one of those employees that believes that you can fly by the seat of your pants and commute on the last possible flight all the time, regardless of weather and ATC. Let's say we are on the same flight and were workign together. The same thing happened to you but this was the 5th time in 12 months you were unable to make your trip due to poor planning on your part. Before it ever got to this point the first 3-4 times it happened should have been a wake up call for you to change your ways. If you failed to do that then you suffer the consequences. YOU made a choice and put YOURSELF in that position. You didn't heed the warnings. Don't blame some policy that you deem as being flawed. The same policy should hold true for me, you and the man on the moon.

 

[MarkMyWords]

see my dear....you missed the point and don't address the issue. ABUSE OF SICK TIME. Talk out your pie hole all you want. I have stated over and over that I feel the cast majority of f/a's are excellent employees. Your insistence that we BRING MORE FLIGHT ATTENDANTS BACK does nothing to address the abuse of sick time issue. So you chose to ignore the problem and just throw more people at it and hope it will go away. That is what got us into trouble in the first place.

Here is a list of questions that you fail to acknowledge....perhaps this format will help you stay on track:


So how many reserves do you feel we should have had in PHL?

How many Flight Attendants should we have to call to cover 3 positions? 6? 10?

How many F/A's should we have sit on reserve just being paid guarentee so that those that are senior reserve can pick an chose if/when they want to work?

When was the last time that you had an employee fired for attendance or dependability and refused to go to bat for them because they are WRONG?

If sick time abuse was not an issue, would there be a need for this idiotic sick policy?

why not address the issue of 4 sick calls, 3 UTC's and 1 who claimed to have been drinking - WHILE ON DUTY!

Have you taken me to task on one single fact in what I have written? Do you dispute that it happened as written?

The sick penalty didn't seem to have an effect on the 4 people that called in sick here did it? Funny how the UTC and dependability program had little or no effect on the fact that 3 people received UTC's isn't it?


You want to know why I have my undies in a wad over this.....well it is because I see the effects on the CUSTOMER! Remember them, the people that pay your salary. Knowing that we endured the additional cost of chartering an airplane pales in comparision to knowing that because of these peoples unwillingness to do their job, we added 3 hours of delay time to an already extensively delayed flight. There is no excuse for that when we were showing that the coverage was there and available. Should I just down play that as being no big deal? There was no lack of staffing, it was a lack of willingness to do the job on the parto fo the 8 people that refused to work.

 

[PITbull]

Mark,

That is why, my friend, you have a company of employees whose human spirit has been decimated by this management. All of mangement has been INFECTED.

Managment's motto on your wall I bet reads: "ALL EMPLOYEES WHO ARE SICK OR SAY THEY ARE SICK ARE BAD AND ARE LIABILITIES TO THE CORPORATION";Exterminate, exterminate exterminate! AND ALL THOSE WHO ARE FEMALE WHO ARE OF CHILD BEARING YEARS AND CARE ABOUT FAMILY, FOCUS ON THEM SPECIFICALLY!".


I swear I once saw a sign in CCY behind a door in Labor relations that read:

"MANAGERS WANTED AT CCY THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO HIRE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE INSENSITIVE, ROBOT LIKE, UNCARING INDIVIDUALS THAT DO NOT CARE ABOUT WAGES, BUT RATHER JUST WANT SOMEWHERE TO GO EVERYDAY AND ENJOY GETTING ABUSED". ANYONE OTHER THAN THE DESCRIPTION ABOVE NEED NOT APPLY"

 

[ClueByFour]

Folks, I gotta tell ya: out here in the Real World tm, if you had to replace a crew of 8 with 10 hot reserve folks, and 6 did not become available, at least 4 would have been walking the bricks come the next day.

This is not about staffing levels. I was kind of hoping that PITBull would address this issue, and not launch into a rant on Mark. If you needed to staff 8, and you had 10 available, staffing was fine. A >%50 failure rate is just unacceptable, regardless of prior circumstances. If you don't want your job, quit and make it available to somebody who wants to work.

There are so many hard working folks on furlough. Eliminate the dead wood. Don't make excuses, don't blame management, don't rant. Stop defending the dead wood.

 

[PITbull]

Clue,

Mark presented a poor scenerio. That is not par. If that were so, you wouldn't get the planes off at all let alone on time.

Our staffing levels have decreased substantially. I make no excuses for any kind of wood. Dead wood , we are not. We have great employees at U. WE are caring, loyal individuals, otherwise, U would have ceased to exist last year. The labor groups are what make the airline operate. You see what mangement is capable of. What can you cite that the employees didn't make happen for the Corporation that helps you get from point A to point B safe and comfortable?

There is much the employees of U have endured that the outside public has no idea, none whatsoever. Flight attendants live with much anxiety today for many reasons I can not go and rehash all over again as I have done on these boards for the past 9 months.

Think about it for awhile. You have no clue what it is to be a reserve on reserve for years and years, get disciplined if your beeper doesn't work even once in those years.

Have you ever had a friend say they tried to beep you once or phone you and you just didn't get the call or the beep? Our folks get disciplined if it happens 3 times in a 12 period. Some infractions are just 2 in twelve months and you start the discipline process leading to termination. We use to be an employee group whose r"reserve status" was just a couple of years. With the stagnation of growth on mainline, these folks are on reserve for most of their careers. Hard to be part of a family and have a family life living out of a suitcase not knowing how many days you will be used in on "on" period. Starting in November, with the new reserve system...there will be no passing permitted.


Mark,

You asked me how many folks have been terminated on the dependability program...None last year in PIT. Presentlly, PIT has 5 on final warning one that got terminated in July. In PIT, there are many on the dependability program. Now PHL is the city that is being tested and targeted. I will find out what the number is in PHL. I know of one specific individual that was terminated for Non-commute, and many "refusal to fly". In PIT we had a few, and they were no grieved because the f/as wanted nothing to do with USAirways company or mangement. One paraticular f/a who was terminated last year, according to PIT President was an excellent f/a and had a great record. He was offered a resignation by the Iflight Director that was there at the time. He did not want to grieve it nor did he want the Senior Director to take it off his record as a resgination. The inflight director was willing to hear the grievance because it had much merit. The f/a did not want anymore to do with this company.

There are more terminations than you would think that do not make it to arbitration because the terminations are warranted. Presently, PIT has 8 grievances in the entire base, but there have been many termiantions this year.

I am very surprised that I have to defend this at all! Specifically with you.