F/A TA agreement

[700UW]

CHAOS is legal and been upheld by the courts, the FAs cannot be disciplined for it.

 

[SparrowHawk]

CHAOS is legal and been upheld by the courts, the FAs cannot be disciplined for it.

Don't waste your breath! Some here are as dumb as a bag of hammers. Also I think there is some risk that US WOULD give the walk-offs a rough road to go, trying to throw up any and all roadblocks against them as punishment for trying to get their hands into Doug's Personal piggy bank, err umm I mean US Airways.

It's like the quote I pasted on another thread.

You aren't nothing to the Tempe Frat Boys except so much SH*T under their heels. Once you figure that out your personal course of action is clear.

 

[Move2CLT]

Don't waste your breath! Some here are as dumb as a bag of hammers. Also I think there is some risk that US WOULD give the walk-offs a rough road to go, trying to throw up any and all roadblocks against them as punishment for trying to get their hands into Doug's Personal piggy bank, err umm I mean US Airways.

It's like the quote I pasted on another thread.

You aren't nothing to the Tempe Frat Boys except so much SH*T under their heels. Once you figure that out your personal course of action is clear.

And you know that because you work here?

 

[FlyUs]

Would you have been one of those that walked off an airplane and sacrificed his job until this was settled?

Its all tough talk with CHAOS until those asked to walk off are told the'll be out of a job until the union negotiates for their return.

I don't think there will be any problem finding willing participants to walk off the airplane. Sign me up.. I'll be the first

 

[SparrowHawk]

And you know that because you work here?

I'll tell you this. I've met & corresponded with more US Airways executives then you have if that makes you feel better.

 

[Move2CLT]

I'll tell you this. I've met & corresponded with more US Airways executives then you have if that makes you feel better.

I wouldn't put money on that.

 

[BoeingBoy]

CHAOS is legal and been upheld by the courts, the FAs cannot be disciplined for it.

After being released and the end of the 30 day cooling off period, of course CHAOS is a legal form of self help. However, the company is entitled to self help as well and it's perfectly legal for the company to hire a replacement for any worker involved in a job action. Ever hear of a lock out? I can apply whether you're talking about 1 or 10,000 workers.

CHAOS is effective not because the workers taking part are immune to repercussions, but because the company can't plan their operation around it since they don't know when or what flights will be affected.

Jim

 

[700UW]

How long does it take to train a new hire? How long does it take to pass the FAA mandated security check? And the only way for the company to impose self-help would be to impose a whole new CBA, then they would risk an all out strike.

But you know this, but you left that part out.

CHAOS is AFA's trademarked strategy of intermittent strikes designed to maximize the impact of an industrial action while minimizing the risk for striking flight attendants.

In May 1993, AFA Members at Seattle-based Alaska Airlines were facing a 30-day cooling-off period after more than three years of futile negotiations, and months of mediation under the supervision of the National Mediation Board. In the past, the company had taken a series of strikes in pursuit of its bargaining demands and seemed prepared to take another one. For years, the company had kept all of its office personnel trained as flight attendants just so they could be used as replacements for striking flight attendants.[3] A traditional strike clearly was doomed to fail. In 1986, thousands of TWA flight attendants represented by a different union had been permanently replaced by corporate raider Carl Icahn in a disastrous traditional strike.

Instead of a traditional strike, the Alaska flight attendants designed and executed a unique campaign that featured surprise tactics and intermittent strikes, called CHAOS (Create Havoc Around Our System). The flight attendants rallied around CHAOS as management had to deal with the fact that travelers could count on only uncertainty if they risked flying during CHAOS. Alaska Airlines flight attendants won a contract they deemed fair by executing the following summary of the CHAOS strategy:

In June, 1993, the cooling-off period mandated by the Railway Labor Act had expired without the parties reaching agreement in the negotiations between AFA and Alaska Airlines. Four days later Alaska Airlines management implemented its imposed work rules. For six weeks flight attendants were free to strike, but instead AFA sought to impact the company purely through the threat of a CHAOS strike, targeted but unannounced strike actions designed to maximize the flight attendants' impact while minimizing their risk.

The company paid office personnel to fly as passengers on every flight and be ready at a moments notice to jump up and perform the duties of flight attendants in the event the working crew initiated a CHAOS strike. During this time, AFA Members off duty also participated in informational picketing and other activities that included the biggest labor rally in the Seattle area for many years. These activities kept the threat of CHAOS in the minds of management, the media and the traveling public.

The first CHAOS strike took place in Seattle when three flight attendants walked off an Alaska Airlines flight just before passenger boarding.[4] A notice was faxed simultaneously to the company offices announcing the CHAOS strike had begun on that particular flight. Twenty minutes later the union faxed a notice to the company explaining the strike was over and that the flight attendants offered to unconditionally return to work. Management could not decide what to do and these flight attendants were held out of service with pay until management simply let them return to work a few weeks later.

A month later, another crew of flight attendants struck the last flight out of Las Vegas.[5] Rather than allowing these flight attendants to come back to work 30 minutes later when the intermittent strike had ended, Alaska management told this crew they were "permanently replaced", much like a traditional strike. This crew was placed on a recall list which the company was required to call from before hiring "off the street" and after about 6–8 weeks each of the flight attendants was recalled with full seniority. During the time they were out of work, they were fully supported through AFA's CHAOS strike donations with the pay they would have earned working as flight attendants.

A few weeks later, AFA struck five flights simultaneously in the San Francisco area.[6] Alaska management suspended these flight attendants and threatened to fire any other flight attendant who would participate in CHAOS strikes. This forced AFA to go to court where the union's attorneys ultimately won a preliminary injunction. In the injunction ruling the court stated the company could not threaten, discipline or fire flight attendants for engaging in intermittent strikes. The only permissible action the company could take would be to replace the flight attendants and put them on a recall list. The suspended strikers were ordered reinstated with full back pay. AFA also financially supported these strikers during the time of their suspension through the CHAOS strike donations.

After striking only seven flights in a period of nine months, AFA had executed the most successful strike in airline history without harming a single union member. CHAOS is seen as a powerful tool that is legally sanctioned and trademarked by AFA.

 

[BoeingBoy]

How long does it take to train a new hire? How long does it take to pass the FAA mandated security check? And the only way for the company to impose self-help would be to impose a whole new CBA, then they would risk an all out strike.

But you know this, but you left that part out.

So you admit that employees can't engage in CHAOS without fear of repercussions? Nice attempt to mislead union brothers and sisters by making it sound that they can't be harmed for engaging in CHAOS. "It's legal" is far from the whole truth...

Self-help is self help. Where is it written that the company has to impose a new contract or lose the right to self-help (not that it's not simple to do by changing a few words)? Can you cite that in any rule, regulation, NMB opinion, or legal ruling? Which would be easier for a company to do - replace thousands of striking FA's or operate without a few dozen that were locked out because of engaging in CHAOS? I suspect that as those engaging in CHAOS were locked out, the support for a job action would start to waver meaning less to participate in it as time went on. It's easy to support something when it doesn't cost you anything, but once employees are locked out for doing it it becomes more likely that fewer would do it. Nothing in life is free - the pros of CHAOS come with cons attached.

Jim

 

[700UW]

Better go read Section 6 of the RLA, how many negotiating committees and CBAs have you been on?

 

[Hope777]

Better go read Section 6 of the RLA, how many negotiating committees and CBAs have you been on?

Enough is Enough Already...... The Past is the Past, YOU did such a awesome job for the union, you still do union work ? Please, I respect the work you did in the past, but today is today, as you said you have moved on, so dont live in the past. You do have some insight of days gone by, but today is just a different day. A union is only as good as the company it is bargaining with.

 

[700UW]

The company has to put in writing its final and best offer to the union and the NMB.

And when they impose it copies have to be give to both.

I can still educate people, now cant I?

 

[ggiby]

I don't think there will be any problem finding willing participants to walk off the airplane. Sign me up.. I'll be the first

OOOHHHH No.... I will be fighting for the chance!!! I have been waiting to conduct Chaos for years... I have worn my green Chaos shirt to the past three afa union meetings...!
I still won't get to use it!!!

But, I would be first in line to walk off.... I know it is risky, but I felt it would be a well deserved vacation.... the back pay would come later.... !!! : )

 

[BoeingBoy]

The company has to put in writing its final and best offer to the union and the NMB.

Pay attention, 700 - I know it's hard. We're talking about after the cooling off period, NOT the steps leading up to that point. The assumption is that both sides have complied with their legal responsibilities up to the point of the cooling off period ending.

A short lesson:

- The company has to make it's final offer - nothing says it has to be a "whole new contract". The impasse could be because the company won't improve the existing contract. The company could only be offering a $1/hour raise while the union is insisting on $5. Whatever. Everything in the company's final offer doesn't have to be different than the existing contract, which is what a "whole new contract" implies.

- If both parties are released, at the end of the cooling off period both are entitled to self help. The company can impose it's final offer and the union can picket, strike, engage in CHAOS, and/or any other form of peaceful self-help.

- The company can lock out employees engaging in self-help. It is then up to the union to get those employee's jobs back in any subsequent negotiations.

I have no idea why you're trying to convince people that engaging in CHAOS is risk free but it certainly explains why so many IAM members hate the IAM (and just about every other union).

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

I know it is risky

That is all that matters. Don't let 700 try to convince you otherwise. As long as you make an informed decision have at it.

Jim