Industry-leading TA reached!

silverbird007 said:
Just worked a 2 day trip, the #1 was ranting about the contract and how horrible it was. I asked him what he thought were the worst things in the TA? He told me that we would be cleaning all flights under 1000 miles, and that we would be staying at Motel 6! I just said "wow I didn't realize that" and walked away. Just an example of galley gossip!
It's a shame his vote is equal to your vote,
 
silverbird007 said:
Just checked the TA concerning cleaning duties. It states flight attendants "may" be required to clean flights under 1000 miles. So that looks like its correct. It states US Airways flight attendants will continue cleaning duties. I guess we will be cleaning the shorter domestic flights. It also states we will be provided gloves and cleaning supplies equivalent to what the contract cleaners use. It states "may" which probably means "will". I found the info on page 37-2 on the TA. Interesting. We used to clean (tidy up) the shorter thru flights a few years back so I guess thats coming back. As far as the hotels are concerned, the TA states hotel/motel. And there is no mention of downtown hotels at all. Does anyone know if US Airways gets downtown layovers or not? If not than we may lose our downtown layovers too. I do like our downtown layovers. I thought that was one of the things the APFA got from Parker back when they were first meeting with US Airways.
So you have to clean planes when you aren't getting paid?
 
I could never understand how you guys agreed to get paid by flight time when you have to report for work and start working at least an hour prior to that. It hurts your ability to negotiate a fair wage because that four hour flight could easily be 8 hours of work so instead of making $40/hr like the company dumps out to the Press you are really only earning $20/hr. Then you have to factor in that they don't get you home every night, that lowers your real earnings for hours worked even more. 
 
If I have to work outside my station I get paid from the time I punch in at JFK till the time I get back and punch out, or I don't go. So if they want me to fix a plane in Bangor, or Toronto or some other out of the way place I get paid straight through. If I didn't then why go? Even with that since we no longer get double-time more and more guys are saying no thanks to field trips. They have tried to break us off the clock and send us to a hotel, but we tell them if you want us to break time then send us a plane to go home. I'll go to a Hotel but not on my time. (The exception to that is training, we get paid for travel time and our regular shift but not time at the Hotel) 
 
With the technology they have today there is no reason why you guys can't badge in at your original station and badge out when you have deboarded everyone off the aircraft. This would be a better reflection of hours worked than flight time. With mechanics feeling the way they do, due to the fact that we are at the very bottom of the industry in pay, benefits and workerules, I think that delays and cancellations will become more commonplace so capturing this time should be a priority.
 
jimntx said:
I would hope they would read and take heed, but flight attendants have not demonstrated in the past a great ability to put reason ahead of emotion, and facts before galley gossip.  Well, when they force a $92 million cut in the total value of the TA, I hope they will step up and be the first to donate all of their increases to those who need that $92 million.  It would be the solidarity thing to do.
How can they force anything? You have contracts in place till 2018 and AA has $2billion in synergies they can't implement?
 
bigjets said:
the FAs would be foolish to vote this TA down, as it would go to arbitration and you would get an average of delta and united not more then delta which is what you WILL get. You will not renegotiate as the pilots will be negotiating the agents start negotiations next month then the IAM/TWU negotiate
Is that what their agreement states? That it goes to arbitration? I thought that like us they have an agreement that becomes amendable in 2018?
 
boston said:
Jimntx and Bigjets, I'm a F/A, and very pleased with the TA, I'm also working the fact rep table, The stuff coming in boggles the mind. There upset with the most innocuous things, or if they find one thing that will pay them less, there voting No, even though its off set and more in an item that occurs more.
 
I'm beginning to come to the conclusion, that the most vocal and contentious who are still hanging on to 2003, have serious personal
trust issues.
 
We have a few who are  leading  the confused down their personal agendas. One call it the underground railroad. Its unconscionable.
 
This a good TA, the new flexible scheduling, we've never seen before, a reserve system that will help mitigate the uncertainty of reserve, kept AA duty rigs, and AA's keep there 401k.
 
The misinformation highway is at full speed, and not a one of the speeder's are willing to slow down and get directions, its the autobahn to
to disaster and they couldn't be more pleased with themselves.
 
From pervious votes we have about 2,300-2,500 that say no to everything, so I'm hoping it keeps at that.
 
If you handed them a gold brick they would say "But its heavy".
 
Cheers
I'll admit I don't know whats in your deal. I think Laura Gladding steered your group through bankruptcy with minimal damage. But to me there are two things that would drive a NO vote from me if it was an "Industry Leading contract" for us. One would be term of the agreement. Does this TA extend the agreement beyond 2018? If the answer is YES then I would vote no. Long contracts are never good contracts, especially when signed under unfavorable conditions. Second, Is there profit sharing in the agreement? While I'm not a big fan of profit sharing in exchange for tangible gains I believe the industry is headed for several years of record breaking profits and I don't think signing a deal that excludes us from those gains is a good deal especially when we were stuck with profit sharing for a decade of concessions where we never received a penny. Its foolish to walk away from it now when they are poised to show record profits. 
 
Question, what was on the table as far as the 401K? 
 
AdAstraPerAspera said:
 
I agree too. Plus there is a segment of our workgroup that has been flying so long, they have become totally out-of-touch with the reality of our job. I mean, think about it. We are so replaceable. Unlike pilots and mechanics, there are a million talented yet unskilled people who would just love to have our jobs. Let's keep that in mind as we vote.
I think that you are not as replaceable as you think you are. I recall Delta bragging that they had thousands of applications and only a few openings. Well there are millions who are unemployed and only a few thousand bothered to fill out an application for Delta, so millions would rather remain unemployed than become a delta flight attendant. One of every twelve American citizens is a felon, so they are automatically excluded from employment in the airlines, thats a huge swath of the population and likely an even larger swath of the unemployed. Then factor in other requirements, dual languages, good health, willingness to sleep in strange hotels all the time and be away from family, ability to train and pass tests and the pool just keeps on shrinking. While I agree FAs are more easily replaced than Pilots or mechanics they are not easily replaced, if they were AA would have done so in 1992 when the APFA struck. The pool of replacements does not get bigger as the size of the company increases, finding 24500 replacement Flight attendants would be more than twice as difficult as finding 12000 replacement flight attendants. 
 
You have more leverage than you think, if you stick together. The sheer size of the airline (the the FA workforce) makes it that much harder to replace you. 
 
As I said I don't know if this is the best deal you can expect to see, but if I see obvious misinformation either way I will question it. 
 
[SIZE=10pt]Q: The Negotiations Protocol Agreement says that if the T/A is not ratified by the membership, the parties will use mediation before going to arbitration. Some FAs think we should vote the T/A down and then get a better deal in mediation — without ever having to go to binding arbitration. Why isn’t that right? [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]A: If this Tentative Agreement gets voted down, the Negotiations Protocol Agreement mandates that the outstanding disputes get sent to binding arbitration within 90 days. There will not be another ongoing round of negotiations if this T/A is rejected. The mediation that follows a “no” vote, if any takes place, will focus on narrowing down the issues we will decide in arbitration. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]To put the situation in context, our T/A is worth about $193 million more annually than the current value of the two contracts (LUS and LAA) combined. “Market rate” is approximately $111 million annually above the current combined value. Since “market rate” is the standard for arbitration, any agreement we reach in arbitration will likely be approximately $82 million annually below the value of this T/A.[/SIZE]
 
 
 
Market Rate.   
 
Now that AA is no longer in BK and  earning very healthy profits is it really necessary to allow AA to define the "Market" by using only the carriers that AA currently wants to compare themselves to? For decades their comparisons included SWA and that was at a time where there was pretty much zero direct competition between them. Shouldn't SWA also be considered to be part of the "market"? 
 
If the NMB is allowing SWA to use rates at AA, US , UAL and CAL in their determination of "Market Rates" then how could they then turn around and rule that SWA is not factored into the Market rate at AA? (for mechanics the same applies to Fed Ex and UPS) 
 
I have serious doubts that once SWA is factored in that the current AA deal, which extends the contract till 2020 is really $82 million above a comprehensive market rate. After SWA is factored in its likely well below market rate. 
 
As I said, I don't know what the APFA agreed to, did they agree that in all negotiations going forward that AA can define the comparators used to define "Market Rates" in arbitration? Yes this isn't section six, but its not 1113 either.  Will the APFA be able to argue that SWA is part of the market, has with the exception of bankruptcy negotiations always been part of the Market and must be considered part of the market?  Whats at stake here is $2 billion in synergies, is the $84 million a fair share when you consider that without the synergies they are already earning billions in profits? AA is losing money every day that you operate as separate entities so its not like they are just handing over $82 million. Why not at least get Profit sharing, that costs them nothing?
 
 
If this is argument possible then I would say VOTE NO because you don't want to be locked into what is still a concessionary deal (that started in 2003)  till 2020 and there is no profit sharing. This agreement will damage every flight attendant in the Industry, including the SWA flight attendants because you know if they end up in front of the NMB, even with SWA reporting billions in profits, (as will AA, UA and Delta), when the NMB looks to determine the Market rate that rate will include not only SWA, but AA, UA & DL.  The fact is that SWA was included by AA when in reality they were not a major competitor, with over 500 planes and service into Airports such as LGA, MCO, etc etc there is no way that they can claim that they aren't a competitor in the market now. 
 
From a quick look at the highlites (and admitted not fully understood)  what I see is higher hourly rates , which is a sure thing, offset by less paid vacation, and no profit sharing. The profit sharing is not a sure thing, but it is a very likely thing and will likely, when combined with less vacation greatly offset the "Industry Lead". In 2013 Delta workers got $500 million in profit sharing, flight attendants probably got 25% or $125 million of that, it will likely be even more this year, was that factored into the market rate? If not then bottom line this is not an industry leading contract.
 
The bigger issue is that it extends the concessions of 2003, and the huge lag behind SWA, till 2020. 
 
From what I can see they need to go back and take off the extra time to the term and add profit sharing.
 
Bob, the "lag" between AA and SW isn't as bad as most think.  SW is paid on a mileage bases, per "trip" which historically dates back to when they only flew DAL-HOU.  We pick up time and are guaranteed actual or scheduled, whichever is greater, which closes the gap some.  Besides, few of us would want their "efficient" work rules, meaning efficient for the company.  I, for one, will take our TA over their contract any time.
 
MK
 
Amen!  Let's not forget that the f/as at WN clean the airplane every leg.  And, 5 leg days are not uncommon.  The most I've ever seen at AA is 4 leg days.  And, we only clean on the mid-station of a through flight, and the inbound leg is less than 1100 miles.  For instance LAX-DFW-MEM with the same flight number, we would not clean because the LAX-DFW leg is too long.  MEM-DFW-LAX with the same flight number, we would clean at DFW.
 
That being said, I haven't seen a through flight in over a year.  When they started having to use the same flight number on turns--i.e., DFW-DEN-DFW, both legs are numbered the same--the through flights just seemed to disappear.  I'm not saying their not happening, I just haven't seen any at DFW.
 
From the APFA:

The results of the balloting are in and 8180 voted yes, 8196 voted No. The official certified results will be posted by the National Ballot Committee shortly.

As per the Negotiations Protocol Agreement, the outstanding issues (those issues reached in the final days of bargaining) shall be submitted for binding arbitration. Our first date for arbitration is Wednesday, December 3rd. Until the arbitration is completed and the new contract is awarded, each legacy workgroup will continue to work under its current contract: the LAA Conditional Labor Agreement and the LUS 'Red Book.'
https://www.apfa.org/negotiations
 
Will Anne Loew be involved in the arbitration? She was involved with these negotiations despite taking the VEO in 2012.

Josh
 
kirkpatrick said:
Bob, the "lag" between AA and SW isn't as bad as most think.  SW is paid on a mileage bases, per "trip" which historically dates back to when they only flew DAL-HOU.  We pick up time and are guaranteed actual or scheduled, whichever is greater, which closes the gap some.  Besides, few of us would want their "efficient" work rules, meaning efficient for the company.  I, for one, will take our TA over their contract any time.
 
MK
For us its a different story. Our hourly pay is around $10/hr less, our 401k is less than half, we get less vacation, less Holidays, less sick, no double time etc. We are probably close to 40% below SWA in total compensation. 
As I said Laura did a good job steering you through BK, hopefully she didn't screw up the deal by giving up too much to get rid of Horton. 
 
 
You guys should keep in mind that UAL is under an amendable (expired) contract, so is SWA. So saying you are industry leading when they have yet to strike a deal is setting yourself up to be bottom of the industry for five years, with no profit sharing to soften the sting. 
 
Still think you guys need to get profit sharing. 
 
Apparently only one third of the membership was in favor of the deal. 
 
Had it passed, and UAL signed just above you, a year from now I suspect that you would have a hard time finding a YES voter. When AA becomes a $50 billion a year company with a 10% margin those who are locked out of the gains won't be too happy. 
 
I admit a selfish motive for you guys to go for Profit sharing. If you guys go without Profit sharing it would make it that much harder for us to get it as well. Why do you think FWAAA is so interested, more for him if you get nothing. 
 
Bob Owens said:
I think that you are not as replaceable as you think you are. I recall Delta bragging that they had thousands of applications and only a few openings. Well there are millions who are unemployed and only a few thousand bothered to fill out an application for Delta, so millions would rather remain unemployed than become a delta flight attendant. One of every twelve American citizens is a felon, so they are automatically excluded from employment in the airlines, thats a huge swath of the population and likely an even larger swath of the unemployed. Then factor in other requirements, dual languages, good health, willingness to sleep in strange hotels all the time and be away from family, ability to train and pass tests and the pool just keeps on shrinking. While I agree FAs are more easily replaced than Pilots or mechanics they are not easily replaced, if they were AA would have done so in 1992 when the APFA struck. The pool of replacements does not get bigger as the size of the company increases, finding 24500 replacement Flight attendants would be more than twice as difficult as finding 12000 replacement flight attendants. 
 
You have more leverage than you think, if you stick together. The sheer size of the airline (the the FA workforce) makes it that much harder to replace you. 
 
As I said I don't know if this is the best deal you can expect to see, but if I see obvious misinformation either way I will question it. 
for 300 spots Delta had more applications (25K) than FAs on the list at the time (around 20K) 
 
I wouldn't say that's "only a few thousand" 
 

Latest posts

Back
Top