It's Going To Be A Bumpy Ride

[TWAnr]

FYI, AA can't fire us for being sick. If we supply a doctors note for actually being sick, nothing they can do!! Remember this...Doctors-Patient records are confidential, just like Attorney-Client.

You are most certainly a promoter of the sickout; that can be easily proven by reading your way too numerous post on that issue.

When (not if, mind you) the company exposes your identity behind the board handle, that information will be used to obtain a court order to expose your phony medical excuse. I do seem to recall, that when medical information is needed to justify an FMLA absence, confidential medical information is provided to AA medical, in order for that department to rule on the legitimacy of the request. I cannot believe that it is much different when it comes to verifying a questionable sick call.

AA is tenacious in fighting illegal job actions, whether those are sanctioned by the union or not. The APFA will probably offer you as the sacrificial lamb in order to avoid the fait that the APA suffered for its members spontaneous actions a few years back.

P.S. After you are fired for cause, you will be ineligible to collect unemployment insurance benefits.

 

[wrx]

P.S. After you are fired for cause, you will be ineligible to collect unemployment insurance benefits.

Wrong my friend. In California, you can file for UE even if you have been fired. That is the only state I believe that allows it.

Trust me I'm not scared of AA or it's attorney's. AA has tried before to sue someone from making negative remarks on another BB and the judge threw it out. The reason is it is just a place that people talk and basically what was called BS.

Once again, I'm not orgainizing a sickout. I can be for it, but I have never admitted to being an orgainzer. All a judge or AA will see is that I'm for having it. You can't be busted for wanting something in life!!

Reason an individual is unemployed

The reason an individual is out of work can affect his/her eligibility for benefits. A person who is laid off is out of work through no fault of his/her own. A person who quits work or is fired from work will be scheduled to a telephone interview because there is a separation issue that must be resolved. The Department interviewer obtains and documents information about the separation from the employer and claimant and decides, according to law and regulations, if the person is eligible to collect benefits. The Department mails a notice to the claimant who is not eligible for benefits. The Department mails a notice to the employer who responded timely to the notice of claim filed. The notice advises the employer about whether the claimant is eligible or not, and whether the employer's account will be charged for benefits paid to the former employee. Either party can disagree with an unfavorable decision and file an appeal.


Read it yourself

 

[KCFlyer]

Wrong my friend. In California, you can file for UE even if you have been fired. That is the only state I believe that allows it.

And Californians wonder why they are the laughingstock of the USA.

 

[wrx]

And Californians wonder why they are the laughing stock of the USA.

Why, because of this?

 

[TWAnr]

And Californians wonder why they are the laughingstock of the USA.

Just as wrx is wrong about me, when wrx assumes that I am a TWA flight attendant, wrx is dead wrong about who is eligible to collect unemployment benefits in CA.

Even wrx's quote from the EDD web site contradicts him or her:

The reason an individual is out of work can affect his/her eligibility for benefits. A person who is laid off is out of work through no fault of his/her own...

Actively promoting an illegal work action is his or her own fault and is good cause to fire wrx.

When I get to my law office later in the day, I will post the relevant code section.

Besides, didn't wrx claim to be based at JFK. That means that AA will force him to apply for UI benefits in NY.

 

[TWAnr]

When I get to my law office later in the day, I will post the relevant code section.

CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE CODE 1256

1256. An individual is disqualified for unemployment compensation
benefits if the director finds that he or she left his or her most
recent work voluntarily without good cause or that he or she has been
discharged for misconduct connected with his or her most recent
work.
An individual is presumed to have been discharged for reasons
other than misconduct in connection with his or her work and not to
have voluntarily left his or her work without good cause unless his
or her employer has given written notice to the contrary to the
department as provided in Section 1327, setting forth facts
sufficient to overcome the presumption. The presumption provided by
this section is rebuttable.

 

[jimntx]

CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE CODE 1256

1256. An individual is disqualified for unemployment compensation
benefits if the director finds that he or she left his or her most
recent work voluntarily without good cause or that he or she has been
discharged for misconduct connected with his or her most recent
work.
  An individual is presumed to have been discharged for reasons
other than misconduct in connection with his or her work and not to
have voluntarily left his or her work without good cause unless his
or her employer has given written notice to the contrary to the
department as provided in Section 1327, setting forth facts
sufficient to overcome the presumption. The presumption provided by
this section is rebuttable.

Which indicates that California's law is in line with the rest of the states. The issue of how and why you are unemployed is part of the basic Federal law which has been in place since the Depression.

The differences lie in each state's interpretation of the law. And, for that matter each Claims Examiner's interpretation of the law. One examiner given a set of circumstances might allow a worker's claim. The examiner in the next door office, given the same set of circumstances, might deny the claim. That's why we have a lovely procedure called the appeals process.

No one can say that a claim will be allowed or denied in every case when there is a dispute. Only in the case of an actual layoff, such as has occurred at the airlines over the past 2 years, is it straightforward that the claim is allowed.

If you are "terminated" for cause or resign on your own volition, you can still file. (For that matter, you can file, even if you've never worked. That doesn't mean you are going to collect a dime, though.) In all probability, your former employer will dispute the claim saying that you were terminated for cause or quit voluntarily. Your claim will be denied, BUT, you can file an appeal to present extenuating circumstances which may or may not change the decision.

A flight attendant fired for being drunk on duty can appeal, but will lose the appeal (more than likely). A flight attendant fired for excessive absenteeism due to cancer or heart trouble and who has exhausted their sick leave might very well be allowed on appeal to receive benefits because the illness was due to circumstances beyond their control.

If you resign because your employer wanted you to do something illegal--such as, ordering an accountant to cook the books--you might still successfully appeal a denial of benefits.

The safe thing is to never say "In such and such a state, you can get benefits even if (fill in the blank)." Each and every case is adjudicated by the applicable state employment service. Which leads me to another misconception. It doesn't matter where you live or file your claim. Your benefits will be paid based upon the laws and rates established IN THE STATE WHERE YOU WORKED. If you are a JFK-based flight attendant, New York Unemployment law applies. If you are a DFW-based flight attendant, Texas law applies. Period, full stop, end of discussion. That provision is in the underlying Federal law to prevent states which pay higher benefit rates from being inundated with laid off workers from states which pay lower benefits.

How does Jim know all this Unemployment Insurance trivia, you ask? He worked for the Texas Employment Commission (now the Texas Workforce Commission) for 7 years. In the original Federal legislation passed during the Great Depression, each state was charged with establishing a state employment service which would assist workers in finding work and administer the payment of unemployment benefits. Each state was given wide latitude in how to implement the law and the amount of benefits to be paid. But the original legislation does set certain parameters. The interesting thing is that the legislation has worked so very well for almost 70 years that there has been very little modification to the law.

 

[Garfield1966]

So I guess I'm missing how that is construed as "corporate greed".

That's because you line in Kansas.

Thank your lucky stars you don't work for a greedy compnay.

Cya.

Gee, corporate greed. Go figure. Kind of like finding a ethical lawyer, a politician with integrity, a honest car sales person.

WRX, grow up will you. Find me a CEO or top exec who does not have his back side covered at the expense of the rank and file. It’s the way things work. I have given up tilting at wind mills long ago.

Like I said earlier. I can’t help but wonder if the poor SOB’s at Pan Am or Eastern think they are better off unemployed and looking for work as opposed to the CEO’s and execs who I am sure had a nice parachute and are probably in nice cushy jobs as wee speak. As I recall, it was the pilots at Pan Am who were planning on teaching the management of Pan Am a lesson.

You all seem to want an efficient company devoid of all waste and greed. Well, I want to win the lottery and peace on earth. Again, find me one example of a billion dollar corporation, or even a multi million dollar corporation which is run “efficientlyâ€￾ so that we can follow their lead.

WRX, I like how you said you would vote no every time. So, you already know what the new contracts will be? Glad to see you’re keeping an open mind.

You are the reason I despise unions. They protect the inept like yourself. I am certain that with out a union to protect your job, you would have been gone long ago.

 

[L1011Ret]

I see in Barrons where there is a suggestion BA might buy another carrier, even AA. Then they (BA) could "staple" him/her to the bottom of their seniority list! How fitting for that full of himself wrx. S/He seems immune to the nuances of social discourse but certainly not to hate.

 

[wrx]

Even wrx's quote from the EDD web site contradicts him or her:

Actively promoting an illegal work action is his or her own fault and is good cause to fire wrx

based at JFK. That means that AA will force him to apply for UI benefits in NY.

1) The EDD link is not wrong. This is why I posted it! Anyone can click on the link I provided and read it, straight from the EDD website.

2) You're dead wrong again! I'm not promoting the sick out. I think it's a great idea, but I'm not promoting it. Please show me at what point I said I was promoting it. You can't do it, because I haven't done it.

3) Wrong again! My friend who was furloughed from AA, she was based at LGA and lives in CA. She is collecting UE in CA. You need to learn how this airline industry works. As a crew member you can claim in the state you live or the state you're based in. Any furloughed airline employee knows that.

4) I find it hard to believe you're an attorney. Maybe you are the receptionist at an office, but not an attorney.

Here is the link for the real EDD in California:
EDD website in California

 

[wrx]

WRX, I like how you said you would vote no every time. So, you already know what the new contracts will be? Glad to see you?re keeping an open mind.

That is just for CONCESSIONS!! So, yes my mind is open!

 

[TWAnr]

1) The EDD link is not wrong. This is why I posted it! Anyone can click on the link I provided and read it, straight from the EDD website.

The link is correct, it just does not say what you would have us believe it says. For your benefit, I posted the actual language of the law, which you can access at this site: California Law.

2) You're dead wrong again! I'm not promoting the sick out. I think it's a great idea, but I'm not promoting it. Please show me at what point I said I was promoting it. You can't do it, because I haven't done it.

Oh, brother. you are now parsing your language. You are advocating that AA flight attendants call in sick, over the holidays, whether they are sick or not. That meets the legal definition of aiding and abetting in promoting an illegal job action. I know who you are. Others do too. Watch out, or you may find yourself terminated from your job for cause.

3) Wrong again! My friend who was furloughed from AA, she was based at LGA and lives in CA. She is collecting UE in CA. You need to learn how this airline industry works. As a crew member you can claim in the state you live or the state you're based in. Any furloughed airline employee knows that.

That is pursuant to California Unemployment Insurance Code Section 609, which states:

609. (a) "Employment" includes service performed for an employing
unit on or in connection with an American vessel operating on
navigable waters within or within and without the United States or on
or in connection with an American aircraft operating within or
within and without the United States, if the employing unit maintains
in this state an operating office from which the operations of the
American vessel or American aircraft are ordinarily and regularly
supervised, managed, directed, and controlled, and such services are
included in "employment" under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act.
(b) All of the provisions of this division shall be applicable to
an employing unit and to service performed in "employment" under this
section in the same manner and to the same extent as to all other
employers, and the wage credits given to, and the payment of benefits
to, any employee of an employing unit under this section shall be in
the same amount, on the same terms, and subject to the same
conditions as applied to employees of other employers under this
division.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE CODE SECTION 609

Unfortunately, not all states have enacted similar legislation and the EDD is still fighting the administrative judges' rulings that held that flights attendants who reside in CA but are based in other states can collect UE benefits in CA.

4) I find it hard to believe you're an attorney. Maybe you are the receptionist at an office, but not an attorney.

Frankly, I could not care less about what you believe.

 

[WingNaPrayer]

Aiding & Abetting? Oh good gawd thank you! I haven't had a good laugh like that in a long time!

Advocating a sick out, or even instigating one, while it may be an infraction of the rules set forth by an employer, is NOT a crime, it is NOT illegal.

I highly doubt you're an attorney either, if you were, you'd have a much better command of your phraseology, not to mention legal terms.

As to the sick out, I certainly advocate it as a highly effective way to get someone's attention, in this case, the corporate hacks. I support it, I think any work group that feels the need to send a message should absolutely go for it. I support it, I approve of it, and I stand staunchly behind whatever labor feels it needs to do when it is being abused, lied to, treated as chattel and being worked to death.

Now, what do you think AA is going to even so much as bother trying to do to me for my unequivocal support of a sick out?

 

[KCFlyer]

Aiding & Abetting? Oh good gawd thank you! I haven't had a good laugh like that in a long time!

Advocating a sick out, or even instigating one, while it may be an infraction of the rules set forth by an employer, is NOT a crime, it is NOT illegal.

I highly doubt you're an attorney either, if you were, you'd have a much better command of your phraseology, not to mention legal terms.

As to the sick out, I certainly advocate it as a highly effective way to get someone's attention, in this case, the corporate hacks. I support it, I think any work group that feels the need to send a message should absolutely go for it. I support it, I approve of it, and I stand staunchly behind whatever labor feels it needs to do when it is being abused, lied to, treated as chattel and being worked to death.

Now, what do you think AA is going to even so much as bother trying to do to me for my unequivocal support of a sick out?

I'd be willing to bet you and wrx are in the minority here. You're impacting your customer with your message. Here's something some of you folks in the airline biz may not know - A lot of the customers on your planes work for a company where their CEO makes a bunch more than your average airline CEO makes. Their CEO has laid off tens of thousands of their coworkers, "offshored" a lot of their jobs, demanded 60 hour workweeks from those that survived the cuts, raised the amount they have to pay for insurance coverage, and limited their annual raises to 3% (if any at all). Then their CEO accepted a couple of million in bonus money for a job well done. Their CEO took his family on corporate jet for their holiday trip, and when those people find that THEIR long anticipated holiday plans were disrupted by a group who felt that their management was being unfair to them, let's just say that they won't feel a warm fuzzy feeling in support of that action.

Again, they don't know, nor do they care, who Don Carty, Gerard Arpey or any other executive is. They'll be ticked off at the FA's who pulled that stunt, and since those FA's represent American Airlines, they'll be a bit upset at AA. Perhaps upset enough to book their next travel on Delta, Southwest, Airtran...pretty much anybody but AA - even if AA gave you double what you want - you screw them over and they'll screw you over...by screwing your company over. Last I checked pretty much every airline needs every penny of revenue that they can generate. How doing something that will insure that future revenues WON'T flow into your company can be construed as a "win", I'll never know.

 

[WingNaPrayer]

Dreamer! AA "screws over", as you put it, thousands of customers every time they misconnect and WON'T WAIT for passengers coming in on other misconnected flights, even by five minutes. That's time a pilot can easily make up in the air, hell most of them can make up a half hour if need be, but noooooooo, not AA, they won't wait.

So, customers of AA have been used to getting screwed for a very long time, this will be nothing new!