It's official!

[Bob Owens]

 
Now, since you are not a flight attendant, and as far as I know, never have been, how about butt out of our discussions. Go back to explaining to the TWU membership that you had nothing to do with the multiple times that the TWU has screwed over its membership by rolling over and playing puppy for the company.

 
 
 
Well since the majority voted NO but few of them show up here I'll stick around just to keep things balanced Jimmy. Don't like it that I bring up different points of view? Too bad. 

 

[700UW]

The interest arbitration between APFA and AA continued Thursday in Washington, D.C. The company called three witnesses to testify: Dr. Darrin Lee, Airline Economist; Patrick Guiltinan, Principle on AA’s Labor Analysis Team; and Jerry Glass, chief negotiator for AA and president of FMH Solutions Group - a management and labor relations consulting firm. For a synopsis of the testimony, click here (Twitter) or here (Facebook). 
 
As a recap:

• In its proposal, APFA proposed that the value of $112 million is the amount that the arbitrators must add to our combined contracts to equal market based in the aggregate. AA stipulated to this value.
• APFA argued for a "me too” for health insurance, meaning that if the company offers another work group health insurance that differs from the health insurance in our JCBA, APFA will have the option of replacing our current insurance with such other health insurance beginning the following year. The company argued against a me too for health insurance.
• APFA argued for a "me too" for profit sharing, meaning that if another workgroup on AA’s property is given a profit sharing plan, APFA has the option of reducing the wage rates by $50 million per year (the value allotted for profit sharing in our proposal) and adopting such profit sharing plan. The company argued against a me too for Profit Sharing.
• APFA asked for pay rates retroactive to December 2, 2014. The company argued against retroactive pay rates.

Following opening remarks by both parties, and the testimony of APFA’s and AA’s witnesses, the Arbitration Panel is now charged with issuing a decision on whether to grant those items that were not stipulated to ($112 million above the value of current contracts) in APFA’s proposal  As soon as more information comes available, it will be posted via this hotline.
 
Q: Is the $3,000 transition payment for LUS Flight Attendants included in the arbitration proposal?
A: Yes, the transition payment helps equalize the benefit packages of the two legacy workgroups and achieve parity. The $3,000 stipend is integral to maintaining the balance.


Leslie Mayo
APFA National Communications Chair
 

 

[eolesen]

Well since the majority voted NO but few of them show up here I'll stick around just to keep things balanced Jimmy. Don't like it that I bring up different points of view? Too bad.

Now you really *are* sounding like WT..

 

[WorldTraveler]

because facts are offensive to you, esp. if they don't line up with your POV?

and there is nothing stopping you or anyone else from posting as much as you want.

 

[jimntx]

 
 
 
Well since the majority voted NO but few of them show up here I'll stick around just to keep things balanced Jimmy. Don't like it that I bring up different points of view? Too bad. 

Get your numbers in order.  You don't have different points of view.  You have A different point of view.  Profit sharing is the end all and the be all of your existence.  We get it.  Give it a rest.
 
And, the majority of the NO votes had nothing to do with profit sharing.  They got their mis-information from Facebook--such as, the lie that LG gets A5 travel for life regardless.

 

[IORFA]

It is completely amazing how uninformed our work group is. Apparently, Bookface is the new source of everything fact. It's worse than Wikipedia. No matter how many facts you throw at people, you can't overcome the Bookface. It really is a shame. People on both sides are just pissed at everyone. It's a shame. Oh, well. Life goes on. It's gotten so bad, I've started to look for a different job. Make this the part time/occasional so as to keep my sanity and friendships. I just can't wrap my head around being willing to accept less than what was being offered when there is NO viable plan to change it. Putting your head in the sand and pouting for the next five years like a pissed off child isn't going to bother Parker and gang. They've had that situation for the last 8 years. They don't care! We're the complete morons that gave them back over $400 MILLION.

 

[Bob Owens]

Get your numbers in order.  You don't have different points of view.  You have A different point of view.  Profit sharing is the end all and the be all of your existence.  We get it.  Give it a rest.
 
And, the majority of the NO votes had nothing to do with profit sharing.  They got their mis-information from Facebook--such as, the lie that LG gets A5 travel for life regardless.

Well you obviously you dont get it and have a problem with comprehension, my biggest issue, which I've repeated over and over again, which you choose not to adress because its inconvienient to your position is the term of the contract. 5 more years. FIVE YEARS WITH ZERO ABILITY TO CAPITALIZE ON AA"S PROFITS!!!! YOU ARE MAKING THE SAME MISTAKE THAT MANY OF US MADE IN THE MID 90's WHEN WE AGREED TO LONG TERM CONCESSIONARY DEALS AS THIS COUNTRY AND INDUSTRY ENTERRED ITS GREATEST EXPANSION EVER AND WE WERE LOCKED OUT OF MAKING GAINS (OR REGAINING SOME OF WHAT WE LOST).


There do you have it now? I doubt it. I'm not a big fan of Profit Sharing and I dont think the Union should agree to place any dollar value on it. I'm not an advocate of having my compensation determined by how the guys in HQ screw things up. Its an incentive plan not a part if the inherant value of our labor. Its an extra. Basically it should be put before the company that the Union will advise its members against participation in any program not covered in the contract that could increase effeciency or the profitability in the company unless there is profit sharing. Unfortunately your Union chose to bend over for Parker and his response was,,,,,.

You guys locked yourself into a long term deal which is bad, the fact that you also locked yourselves out of Profit Sharing makes it even worse.

I believe you asked earlier when has AA ever been consistantly profitable, I ask you when was the last time you saw AA pay dividends? In my 28 years I have seen many profitable years, and all of them were post deregulation, but this is the only time I recall dividends being paid.

We are entering a new phase for the industry, not perpetual billion dollar profits but much like other mature industries a period of stabilization, minimal competition, minimal expansion, the industry has become an oligopoly. Due to its high reliance on labor they will find a way to hide the money by the time 2019 arrives. Maybe toilets seat will go from $1000 to $3000, landing fees from $4500 to $45000 but they will find a way to move the money into places where labor isnt much of a factor.

Your five year deal just wiped out the opportunity to try and restore what the job once was as far as Compensation. Come 2020 Airlines will be sitting in front of PEBs even more frequently than the Rails.

 

[jcw]

Can you guarantee AA will be hugely profitable the next 5 years - can you guarantee oil will stay at $60 a barrel - can you guarantee there will be no war or economic downturn - if you can say yes or if you want to take the risk that some years you might not get profit sharing checks - then go for it
 
You just have to remember when times are bad and the checks don't come - you can't complain about it - you should agree to that in the contract - no one remembers the bad times

 

[Bob Owens]

It is completely amazing how uninformed our work group is. Apparently, Bookface is the new source of everything fact. It's worse than Wikipedia. No matter how many facts you throw at people, you can't overcome the Bookface. It really is a shame. People on both sides are just pissed at everyone. It's a shame. Oh, well. Life goes on. It's gotten so bad, I've started to look for a different job. Make this the part time/occasional so as to keep my sanity and friendships. I just can't wrap my head around being willing to accept less than what was being offered when there is NO viable plan to change it. Putting your head in the sand and pouting for the next five years like a pissed off child isn't going to bother Parker and gang. They've had that situation for the last 8 years. They don't care! We're the complete morons that gave them back over $400 MILLION.

Maybe they were uniformed and what I'm getting is that you all are saying they should have settled for a bad deal because the other deal was worse. Or are you saying that this Five year deal, where you agreed to concessions on medical and get less vacation than your peers at UAL and on top of that do not get profit sharing is a great deal?

You do realize that by the time you factor in inflation you will not be any better off in 2020 than you are now? It comes out to three percent per year. Which is around the average rate of inflation over the last 50 years. You will probably be worse off due to the concessions on Medical, especially if you have kids.

 

[Bob Owens]

Can you guarantee AA will be hugely profitable the next 5 years - can you guarantee oil will stay at $60 a barrel - can you guarantee there will be no war or economic downturn - if you can say yes or if you want to take the risk that some years you might not get profit sharing checks - then go for it
 
You just have to remember when times are bad and the checks don't come - you can't complain about it - you should agree to that in the contract - no one remembers the bad times

Can you guarantee that AA will not file, or threaten to file for Bankruptcy again and demand the 9% increase back? There are no guarantees in this industry.

You sit in aluminum tube, subjected to increased radition from the Sun, let alone walking though the scanners over and over again, with poor quality air, are exposed to hundreds of sick people each trip , travelling at 600 MPH eight miles high where if something goes wrong there is nothing left of you to bury and you have no tolerance for risk?

Your fears are irrational. Every day you are exposed to risk.

I suppose you have resigned yourself to the security of poverty rather than risk failure and strive for middle class.

I remember the bad times, I'm still in them, so are you, and you still will and would have been regardless of whether this contract had passed or not. Unlike you I'd like to get back to the good times.

 

[jcw]

I completely agree that we can't guarantee AA won't file, etc - hence better to get what you can in base - base comp is always "in the bank" than variable comp - if people are afraid of radiation etc they should change careers - there is no way any comp can make up for those fears

 

[johnny kat]

Two kinds of people at this airline:  People who will do anything to prove they are right in their cause.  And people who want to make some money for their labor and have a better life for them and their family.
 
Bob Owens, which type are you?  Sure it sounds great to pontificate on and on about what the f/as should be getting but in reality the f/as are not even getting what was offered thanks to their stupidity.  Plain and simple.  The no voters misunderstood what this vote was all about from the beginning.  This was not section 6 as most of the no voters misunderstood even while being told so by the company, APFA, and the UCC from the very beginning of this merger.
 
This was an agreed on process by which a merger would take place.  Everyone knew it but some people didn't understand or chose to ignore what this vote was really about.  It was about the 2 choices:  Choice A which was a better paying choice or Choice B which was not better paying but one where you could voice your opinions about the state of affairs in this merger and industry knowing full well that if you chose the B option it would result in less money for you and your family because of the word "AGGREGATE".
 
And then we come to the group that just were too lazy or dumb to even vote this one time, which was probably the most important ballot they would have ever cast in their airline career.  There is no words that come to mind to adequately express how I feel about these people except to say, let's weed them out and get rid of them, because they bring nothing to the table for this enterprise and are probably just hear to get a paycheck regardless of how small.  And could care less about their fellow employees.

 

[AirLUVer]

Bob, this was a industry leading contract base on the comparators that were allowed.  The only airline that was left out was WN.  When you include the International Override pay and the other Premium Pays, this was an even better contract.  Yes some other companies give better VC accrual, but other companies don't have the same pay protections.  All put together, it is a better contract than DL/UA/CO.  

 

[jcw]

While I understand the point about folks that did not vote - however there are people who like their jobs and don't like being part of a union and hence they don't participate in the union process (ie voting)

 

[jimntx]

While I understand the point about folks that did not vote - however there are people who like their jobs and don't like being part of a union and hence they don't participate in the union process (ie voting)

Then they have no reason to complain if they don't like the arbitrated contract.  Not voting IS a vote.  It is voting "I don't care."  And, by default, it is also voting NO.