Letter fron NWA AFA Vice-President

[2BlacknBlue]

Compelling testimony!

http://deltaafa.org/aefiles/Pat%20Testimony%20DL-NW.pdf

 

[Wings]

Thanks for the letter Danny and we really thank you and your fellow flight attendants at NW for your support. I too support a collective barganing agreement. Unfortunately I and many other DAL f/a's do not support AFA's automatic DOH policy and if and only IF the AFA campaign is unsuccessful it will be because of the DOH policy. That is why we would rather AFA change this policy or and I can only speak for myself (but there is a growing number ) we will have to pass on this vote and have the right to negotiate a fair intergration policy. By voting for AFA now we are getting just the opposite of what AFA claims they will do for us, and that is negotiate on our behave. The purpose of having a union is COLLECTIVE barganing, that also means negotiating a fair intergration policy, and I dont care how you say it DOH is only fair for a few people. DOH sounds fair but it is not based on the fact that 2 seperate companies have had different hiring plans.

As a NWA FA who has already participated in three mergers in my career (at thirty years), allow me to remind you of what so many others have mentioned in previous threads regarding seniority integration "discussions" ....

While discussions were held between both FA groups (including representatives from their unions, as well as, FAs elected to "seniority integration" committees) in all three mergers that I have been a part of (Southern Airways, Hughes Airwest, and Northwest Orient) - in the end - NO solution or compromise could ever be reached. In each merger, the issue of seniority integration went to an arbitrator which resulted in a neutral party deciding the issue for both groups. And arbitration is binding - which means that the decision cannot be overturned. I can assure you that no matter how much negotiating takes place on both sides, the seniority integration issue will go to binding arbitration in a merger between DAL and NWA. Many of you DAL FAs (when one couples your list of demands with your management's divisive rhetoric/tactics) have already set up the "perfect storm" for this to happen ....

My personal experience in the three mergers I have participated in so far - includes DOH for each seniority integration. And as AFA activists have pointed out, the last major merger in our industry (NW/RC) will be closely looked at and used as a precedent if this merger is approved. The numbers are almost identical as well; DAL has close to twice as many FAs compared to NWA.

After the NW/RC merger, AFA changed their merger policy to include DOH when two AFA carriers are involved. Why? Because it is the most fair and equitable way to merge groups. And in the end (years later), both parties will not hold grudges against the other. That is what makes a merger successful for years to come. If FAs want anything other than DOH - it is only because they are thinking of themselves and not what is good for the majority of the group. You also cannot compare a pilot seniority integration process to a FA group's. Our pay for an entire career is not predicated on aircraft type. And that is the principle reason why you shouldn't even attempt to use the recent America West/US Air problem as a basis for arguing against DOH integration.

It is important to point out, as well, that in each merger, my seniority number went down, but my relative base position did not change, which resulted in the ability to fly the same types of trips I could hold prior to the merger (being based in MSP - the largest and second largest base - depending on which merger we are looking at).

Many of the DAL FAs based in NYC talk about their fears that NWA FAs will transfer into their base and take away their international flying. As a MSP FA I can say THAT won't happen. Since our most recent buy-out, I believe that MSP is now our most senior base. The majority of senior FAs either fly "day" trips, international trips out of our base, or short domestic trips. They have no desire to commute. Furthermore, out of other bases, junior and senior FAs won't be flocking to NYC because of the high commuter costs associated with flying out of that city. If you also factor in the declining dollar and how expensive it is to travel abroad - very few FAs will even consider commuting to NYC and flying those trips. No matter what kind of a scenario you all try and paint - it's just not going to happen.

I've come to the conclusion that those of you who now state that you want a union, but refuse to vote FOR AFA only because of the DOH issue, really don't want any union on DAL property. It's just another feeble excuse.

When you take into account that your VP of Inflight Services Joanne Smith recently met with NWA executives to formulate a joint plan to pit one FA group against the other - does this sound like DAL management really wants to make this merger a success? Keep in mind that CEO Richard Anderson is the man who ultimately hands down the directives to management ....

And no matter what developments arise on a weekly basis with regard to management at both carriers, DAL FAs who don't want a union, still can't be convinced that being protected by a union is desperately needed. Are you people so accustomed to having management tell you what to do all these years that you can no longer think for yourselves? Management couldn't be more divisive in their dealings with our work groups right now. What they are doing during this representational campaign not only proves it, but it is just the "tip of the iceberg".

Please open your eyes and start looking at this situation clearly. If you don't - both FA groups are going to suffer tremendously for it once this merger is approved - with no union to protect everyone. And Richard Anderson and his management team (behind the scenes) will be laughing their heads off because they succeeded in pulling the wool over the DAL FAs eyes "in spades" this time around. Here at NWA .... we've seen these types of scenarios over and over again for years. There have been times when we took management at their "word", it backfired, management high-fived each other on another win against the FAs - but the NWA FAs learned to not trust management because of it - and the majority realize that without a union, we don't have a prayer trying to protect our profession (merger or no merger). Whether you truly want to believe it or not, we aren't lying, we're not trying to protect our OWN best interests - we are trying to protect the ENTIRE FA group at what will become the new Delta Airlines (and FAs at other U.S. carriers). Remember, DAL executives have always prided themselves on their willingness to give you "industry standard". What do you think the "industry standard" for FAs will be when every other carrier goes for the jugular and demands DAL's new pay, work rules, and benefits?

I probably should also point out that we have all kinds of employee committees within every labor group at NWA that work directly with management to try and solve various issues/problems and initiate improvements (despite what Joann Smith and Richard Anderson are telling you). But, if you don't want to take our word for it, you want to continue to believe that your executives are being forthright with you, and you don't want a union "standing between you and management" - great! Just be prepared to find another job .... I'll guarantee you that at least 40% of our jobs will be cut due to outsourcing after the merger is approved, IF your current AFA election fails, or a second NMB vote fails. Did you notice that oil went up to $126/barrel this week? How do you think the airline is going to manage the high cost of fuel? The easiest way to save mega bucks will be through outsourcing our jobs to the cheapest labor they can round up in various parts of the world.

Without a union for FAs at the new Delta - our profession will be set back for decades. I hope you all aren't counting on permanent pay raises or improvements to work rules or benefits (that will actually cost the company any real money) if this union vote fails. Under the direction of Richard Anderson, with a brand new management team in place, and no union on the property, they will take advantage of that in every aspect that they can. It won't take long for Richard to renege on your recent improvements if the merger is approved and a second NMB vote fails.

Good luck to all employee groups (minus the pilot group, of course) - we all are going to need it!

 

[1Conehead]

1conehead:

I wasn't the author of the letter. Look at it again.

Sorry danny, My bad.
I guess I'll keep reading your long ,but informative posts.

 

[Danny Campbell]

thanks -- I'll try to keep any future posts less 'long'

 

[GSEMAN]

There's no real Ignore feature here to my knowledge.
Your post was so transparent that I had to express that I could see right through it.

LOL...nice come back LSW

 

[cooper43]

As a NWA FA who has already participated in three mergers in my career (at thirty years), allow me to remind you of what so many others have mentioned in previous threads regarding seniority integration "discussions" ....

While discussions were held between both FA groups (including representatives from their unions, as well as, FAs elected to "seniority integration" committees) in all three mergers that I have been a part of (Southern Airways, Hughes Airwest, and Northwest Orient) - in the end - NO solution or compromise could ever be reached. In each merger, the issue of seniority integration went to an arbitrator which resulted in a neutral party deciding the issue for both groups. And arbitration is binding - which means that the decision cannot be overturned. I can assure you that no matter how much negotiating takes place on both sides, the seniority integration issue will go to binding arbitration in a merger between DAL and NWA. Many of you DAL FAs (when one couples your list of demands with your management's divisive rhetoric/tactics) have already set up the "perfect storm" for this to happen ....

My personal experience in the three mergers I have participated in so far - includes DOH for each seniority integration. And as AFA activists have pointed out, the last major merger in our industry (NW/RC) will be closely looked at and used as a precedent if this merger is approved. The numbers are almost identical as well; DAL has close to twice as many FAs compared to NWA.

After the NW/RC merger, AFA changed their merger policy to include DOH when two AFA carriers are involved. Why? Because it is the most fair and equitable way to merge groups. And in the end (years later), both parties will not hold grudges against the other. That is what makes a merger successful for years to come. If FAs want anything other than DOH - it is only because they are thinking of themselves and not what is good for the majority of the group. You also cannot compare a pilot seniority integration process to a FA group's. Our pay for an entire career is not predicated on aircraft type. And that is the principle reason why you shouldn't even attempt to use the recent America West/US Air problem as a basis for arguing against DOH integration.

It is important to point out, as well, that in each merger, my seniority number went down, but my relative base position did not change, which resulted in the ability to fly the same types of trips I could hold prior to the merger (being based in MSP - the largest and second largest base - depending on which merger we are looking at).

Many of the DAL FAs based in NYC talk about their fears that NWA FAs will transfer into their base and take away their international flying. As a MSP FA I can say THAT won't happen. Since our most recent buy-out, I believe that MSP is now our most senior base. The majority of senior FAs either fly "day" trips, international trips out of our base, or short domestic trips. They have no desire to commute. Furthermore, out of other bases, junior and senior FAs won't be flocking to NYC because of the high commuter costs associated with flying out of that city. If you also factor in the declining dollar and how expensive it is to travel abroad - very few FAs will even consider commuting to NYC and flying those trips. No matter what kind of a scenario you all try and paint - it's just not going to happen.

I've come to the conclusion that those of you who now state that you want a union, but refuse to vote FOR AFA only because of the DOH issue, really don't want any union on DAL property. It's just another feeble excuse.

When you take into account that your VP of Inflight Services Joanne Smith recently met with NWA executives to formulate a joint plan to pit one FA group against the other - does this sound like DAL management really wants to make this merger a success? Keep in mind that CEO Richard Anderson is the man who ultimately hands down the directives to management ....

And no matter what developments arise on a weekly basis with regard to management at both carriers, DAL FAs who don't want a union, still can't be convinced that being protected by a union is desperately needed. Are you people so accustomed to having management tell you what to do all these years that you can no longer think for yourselves? Management couldn't be more divisive in their dealings with our work groups right now. What they are doing during this representational campaign not only proves it, but it is just the "tip of the iceberg".

Please open your eyes and start looking at this situation clearly. If you don't - both FA groups are going to suffer tremendously for it once this merger is approved - with no union to protect everyone. And Richard Anderson and his management team (behind the scenes) will be laughing their heads off because they succeeded in pulling the wool over the DAL FAs eyes "in spades" this time around. Here at NWA .... we've seen these types of scenarios over and over again for years. There have been times when we took management at their "word", it backfired, management high-fived each other on another win against the FAs - but the NWA FAs learned to not trust management because of it - and the majority realize that without a union, we don't have a prayer trying to protect our profession (merger or no merger). Whether you truly want to believe it or not, we aren't lying, we're not trying to protect our OWN best interests - we are trying to protect the ENTIRE FA group at what will become the new Delta Airlines (and FAs at other U.S. carriers). Remember, DAL executives have always prided themselves on their willingness to give you "industry standard". What do you think the "industry standard" for FAs will be when every other carrier goes for the jugular and demands DAL's new pay, work rules, and benefits?

I probably should also point out that we have all kinds of employee committees within every labor group at NWA that work directly with management to try and solve various issues/problems and initiate improvements (despite what Joann Smith and Richard Anderson are telling you). But, if you don't want to take our word for it, you want to continue to believe that your executives are being forthright with you, and you don't want a union "standing between you and management" - great! Just be prepared to find another job .... I'll guarantee you that at least 40% of our jobs will be cut due to outsourcing after the merger is approved, IF your current AFA election fails, or a second NMB vote fails. Did you notice that oil went up to $126/barrel this week? How do you think the airline is going to manage the high cost of fuel? The easiest way to save mega bucks will be through outsourcing our jobs to the cheapest labor they can round up in various parts of the world.

Without a union for FAs at the new Delta - our profession will be set back for decades. I hope you all aren't counting on permanent pay raises or improvements to work rules or benefits (that will actually cost the company any real money) if this union vote fails. Under the direction of Richard Anderson, with a brand new management team in place, and no union on the property, they will take advantage of that in every aspect that they can. It won't take long for Richard to renege on your recent improvements if the merger is approved and a second NMB vote fails.

Good luck to all employee groups (minus the pilot group, of course) - we all are going to need it!

I am sorry that we dont see eye to eye on this issue, but I do not fear an arbitrator any more than DOH. Can you tell me what is wrong or unfair about having people for both groups sit down and look at the list and see the most fair way to merge, for everyone. And I keep saying that all I'm advocating is a review by DAL and NWA to research if DOH would be fair for all, before we merge and then it will be too late. Why do some insist on DOH as the only fair way. And f/a's do share more in common with pilots than others positions on the ground. We travel and spend a lot of time away from home. What trips we hold determines our pay and some could potentially face a huge pay cut with strict DOH. I would at least feel more comfortable knowing that it was being looked at. I am not, REPEAT......NOT wanting to disadvantage NWA. However the fact that most of the people I come in contact here on the DAL message board, are opposed to any negotiation makes me wonder what they may have to gain.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

I am sorry that we dont see eye to eye on this issue, but I do not fear an arbitrator any more than DOH. Can you tell me what is wrong or unfair about having people for both groups sit down and look at the list and see the most fair way to merge, for everyone. And I keep saying that all I'm advocating is a review by DAL and NWA to research if DOH would be fair for all, before we merge and then it will be too late. Why do some insist on DOH as the only fair way. And f/a's do share more in common with pilots than others positions on the ground. We travel and spend a lot of time away from home. What trips we hold determines our pay and some could potentially face a huge pay cut with strict DOH. I would at least feel more comfortable knowing that it was being looked at. I am not, REPEAT......NOT wanting to disadvantage NWA. However the fact that most of the people I come in contact here on the DAL message board, are opposed to any negotiation makes me wonder what they may have to gain.

Cooper,
I'll tell you a little story although I know it's not going to change your mind.
13 years ago, when I flew out of JFK for a while, I was on a layover in Rome and went to dinner with two former PanAm FAs. One was former National and the other, original PanAm. During that merger, the judge/arbitrator gave National FAs more seniority over their orig. PanAm counterparts in many of the seniority groups. That was in 1980. Ok, so we are at dinner and this huge fight breaks out between the two of them over their seniority..something that had happened 15 years prior!! I mean it was so embarassing that I was wanting to slink away from the table. The moral to my story is that had these 2 ladies been sequenced by date of hire, no fight would have ever broken out because everyone respects, naturally, time served. Now, having said that, I have also spent much, much time in former WAL bases and NEVER did a similar fight break out because date of hire was used (except for a tiny fraction..300.. of WAL f/a's at the top of the seniority list).
The other moral of my story is that you will have to live with whatever the judge/arbitrator passes down. There is no more negotiating..it is binding and you will have to live with that decision. You seem like a pretty even-tempered (albeit soemwhat stubborn) person, however, I hope I'm not in an Italian restaurant with you in 15 years when a NW f/a 2 years junior to you brings up that she/he outbid you for a particular trip. Watch the flying plates!!

 

[Yankeestu]

Cooper,
I'll tell you a little story although I know it's not going to change your mind.
13 years ago, when I flew out of JFK for a while, I was on a layover in Rome and went to dinner with two former PanAm FAs. One was former National and the other, original PanAm. During that merger, the judge/arbitrator gave National FAs more seniority over their orig. PanAm counterparts in many of the seniority groups. That was in 1980. Ok, so we are at dinner and this huge fight breaks out between the two of them over their seniority..something that had happened 15 years prior!! I mean it was so embarassing that I was wanting to slink away from the table. The moral to my story is that had these 2 ladies been sequenced by date of hire, no fight would have ever broken out because everyone respects, naturally, time served. Now, having said that, I have also spent much, much time in former WAL bases and NEVER did a similar fight break out because date of hire was used (except for a tiny fraction..300.. of WAL f/a's at the top of the seniority list).
The other moral of my story is that you will have to live with whatever the judge/arbitrator passes down. There is no more negotiating..it is binding and you will have to live with that decision. You seem like a pretty even-tempered (albeit soemwhat stubborn) person, however, I hope I'm not in an Italian restaurant with you in 15 years when a NW f/a 2 years junior to you brings up that she/he outbid you for a particular trip. Watch the flying plates!!

When I went to NYC right after we intergrated Pan Am, it was assumed I was former Pan Am since I was the first wave into NYC. When they found out I was OD the attitude towards me completely changed. A LOD FA yelled at me for getting crew rest before her, because my DAL seniority bumped her slightly below me. It still exists today to a certain extent. I still have the question asked "Are you original Delta?" and I always answer hesitantly for fear of their reaction.

Also, why does anyone think forming a group of my peers (cool aid drinkers that volunteer for all things toting the company line AKA "EIG" members and a group of NW FA's with a binding contract that wont settle for anything other than date of hire because no matter how you dice it that is the fairest intergration process (even though it isn't the most adventagious way for the vastly junior NW FA's)? IT WILL RESULT IN ARBITRATION...why because NW would most likely fair better in arbitration than anything else that could be cooked up by groups of our peers.
Arbitrators deal with the law.......when they are holding a legal contract in their hands that protects their seniority versus our family culture with a wicked step father that could care less about anything except the $$$$ in his pocket, do you honestly think they would come up with a better intergration than date of hire.

You are being selfish and uninformed to think anything other than date of hire is going to keep us from losing seniority. It is business and you are nothing but a number, why would anyone looking at the big picture care if you gain or lose seniority, when chances are without a contract you WILL lose your job. The head of the EIG admitted that out sourcing is a huge possibility but felt if it saved our company it was worth doing. Really, the closest thing to a group that represents you is ready to give your job away to save the company money.

The writing is on the wall and the few people that read and write on this message board that are DAL FA's in oppostion to a legally binding contract are the ones that are going to lose their jobs. And when it happens and you come to this message board to cry about your furlough, how do you think the people that are fighting hard to keep YOU from being exploited and out sourced will feel?

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

The writing is on the wall and the few people that read and write on this message board that are DAL FA's in oppostion to a legally binding contract are the ones that are going to lose their jobs. And when it happens and you come to this message board to cry about your furlough, how do you think the people that are fighting hard to keep YOU from being exploited and out sourced will feel?

Yankeestu--
It's sad that a few of these people are willing to take the risk of selling their jobs down the river, so-to-speak, for a short-term gain of a few seniority numbers. A gain, that is NOT even guaranteed and most likely, will never happen. Cooper is only looking at the short-term. It is amazing that he/she is not voting because of the DOH issue only. (Cooper, if you're "ripped" up your ballot, you can get another VIN/PIN from the NMB if you change your mind.)
You're right..the only people who seem to be having a problem with DOH are under 15 years. The very ones that will be the first to go if they start to outsource. There was an article in the business section the other day that said airlines are getting very close to reaching their limit on raising fares (to cover oil) before they start scaring people away. I do appreciate, at this point, that all airlines have realized that they can't subsidize high oil prices and cheap fares off the backs of their employees. But as that article points out, there's going to be a limit and what will they do next? They will cut capacity, yes (again, reducing the headcount), but if ,as some financial houses predict, oil goes close to $200/b next summer, it's going to be a whole different world and I do believe they will try outsourcing...every other industry has done it.

 

[SKY HIGH]

I too support a collective barganing agreement. Unfortunately I and many other DAL f/a's do not support AFA's automatic DOH policy and if and only IF the AFA campaign is unsuccessful it will be because of the DOH policy. That is why we would rather AFA change this policy or and I can only speak for myself (but there is a growing number ) we will have to pass on this vote and have the right to negotiate a fair intergration policy.

Ok, explain your "integration theory" to these two F/A's

BOTH HIRED ON MAY 12, 1988, both have 20 YEARS SENIORITY. One works for NW. One works for DL.

EXPLAIN TO ME, WHY ONE SHOULD GAIN OR LOSE SENIORITY OVER THE OTHER?

 

[Scramble]

Ok, explain your "integration theory" to these two F/A's

BOTH HIRED ON MAY 12, 1988, both have 20 YEARS SENIORITY. One works for NW. One works for DL.

EXPLAIN TO ME, WHY ONE SHOULD GAIN OR LOSE SENIORITY OVER THE OTHER?

DOB, then if born at exact same time in the same time zone, flip a coin or rock/paper/scissors.

 

[SKY HIGH]

DOB, then if born at exact same time in the same time zone, flip a coin or rock/paper/scissors.

.........you're missing the point. Cooper, the previous poster advocates an integration method that DOESNT PROTECT the FLIGHT ATTENDANT'S SENIORITY. His or her thinking is, change DOH for the PROTECTION of his or her "JOB". And ironically, that ONLY COMES FROM SENIORITY AND------------> AFA, who advocates voluntary leaves, etc to protect jobs!

 

[Scramble]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see what the problem is with DOH. It seems pretty straight forward and it's not like we're adding NW's 9,000 or so FA's to DL's current route system. Granted, the combined routes will be smaller than the two are separately but there still should be plenty of flying for everybody. I've got 13 yrs flying with DL so I'm not really sure where I would stand on a combined seniority list. I already lost about 5 yrs when I transferred to In-flight so moving around in seniority is not totally new to me. On a side note, I'm still not sure how I'm going to vote concerning AFA. I really don't trust either one (DL mgmt/AFA). I almost feel like I'm choosing the lesser of two evils. Having said that, if I had to decide today, I'd vote for AFA.

 

[cooper43]

Ok, explain your "integration theory" to these two F/A's

BOTH HIRED ON MAY 12, 1988, both have 20 YEARS SENIORITY. One works for NW. One works for DL.

EXPLAIN TO ME, WHY ONE SHOULD GAIN OR LOSE SENIORITY OVER THE OTHER?

Ok DOH would be a problem for these two. But what about this scenerio: (this is only a hypothetical )

NWA hired 2000 f/a's in 1998 and DAL hired none. DAL hired 2000 f/a's in 1999 and NWA hired none. Now DOH says that all 2000 DAL flight attendants would go under the 2000 NWA and they both hired the same amount of f/a's but just one year apart. now i have no idea what NWA f/a's can hold at this hypothetical level not DAL but I do believe DAL has more variety to chose from, but that is mirely my opinion. The point is that wouldnt it be a more fair and equitable merger plan to take those 4000 f/a's and do a one for one? Or would you want to drop 2000 numbers because of DOH. I am being acqused of drinking the Koolaide but you have to stop and think whose else is offering Koolaide? AFA? This cuts both ways. DOH could just as easily disadvantage NWA or DAL. I still do not think DOH addresses all of the issues. And yes I may be stubborn and yes I am thinking of my self, but I am not trying to take advantage of any NWA f/a's. I just want what is fair. I wish they would just leave us seperate and let each airline operate seperately. But that not going to happen. Once again I mean no ill will towards any who take opposing views, that is what this forum is about.

 

[2BlacknBlue]

Ok DOH would be a problem for these two. But what about this scenerio: (this is only a hypothetical )

NWA hired 2000 f/a's in 1998 and DAL hired none. DAL hired 2000 f/a's in 1999 and NWA hired none. Now DOH says that all 2000 DAL flight attendants would go under the 2000 NWA and they both hired the same amount of f/a's but just one year apart. now i have no idea what NWA f/a's can hold at this hypothetical level not DAL but I do believe DAL has more variety to chose from, but that is mirely my opinion. The point is that wouldnt it be a more fair and equitable merger plan to take those 4000 f/a's and do a one for one? Or would you want to drop 2000 numbers because of DOH. I am being acqused of drinking the Koolaide but you have to stop and think whose else is offering Koolaide? AFA? This cuts both ways. DOH could just as easily disadvantage NWA or DAL. I still do not think DOH addresses all of the issues. And yes I may be stubborn and yes I am thinking of my self, but I am not trying to take advantage of any NWA f/a's. I just want what is fair. I wish they would just leave us seperate and let each airline operate seperately. But that not going to happen. Once again I mean no ill will towards any who take opposing views, that is what this forum is about.

Coop? Is that you? Yeah..yeah...Yeah, that's you coop! I remember you! Remember, the sign was posted for the clubhouse party beginning at 9:00 p.m. and ending @ 3:00 a.m. but you showed up at the locked clubhouse doors at 4:00 a.m, beating and banging on the doors because the party was over? Yeah..yeah, that's you! You drove the store clerk crazy by emptying all the store shelves cereal boxes on the floor because the cereal boxes advertised a free toy inside! You explained to the manager that you wanted the free toy, not the cereal inside! Yeah..yeah, that's you!!! Remember that Rick Springfield/Alice Cooper concert? 1000 young fans showed up in front of you to buy tickets but you complained to the concert manager that you and a legend of old fans were die hard fanatics and that you think that the ticket line should be one old fan, one new fan, etc.....Yeah..yeah..that's you!

How you doing?