MAA flight attendant press release

[MarkMyWords]

They did not know. The contract was supposed to be the American Eagle contract until one could be negotiated. Even after the contract was accepted nobody had a hard copy of to reference. But that situation pales in relation to the certificate status. MDA was operated on the USAirways certificate during its whole existence. FA's were hired with the understanding that it would be operated on a separate cert (Potomac). Which never happened. 'Back Pay up to the First Day" should be the motto for these unfortunate crewmembers.

I still don't get the hang up on the issue of what certificate the airplanes operated under. Regardless of whether it was under the potomac cert of the US cert, you still agreed to work "AA Eagle type" contract. If you were not comfortable with that, then you had a choice about accepting recall or not.

 

[BottomFeeder]

Honestly, I have no idea where that number came from..but, I will try to find out. i was also shocked to see billions too. But, my guess is the lawyer has his reasons and I know in just regular lawsuits they always ask for way more and then if it is settled out of court they will at least come up with a good settling number..but, i really do not know. maybe someone on here like the person who started this thread will know.

Just a guess but:

The law firm of Dowe,Screwem&Howe will get 1.1 Billion and the F/A's will get 100 million minus the costs.

 

[xoxo]

To be honest..the flight attendants want their longevety and back pay. I myself do not care about anything else. We atleast deserve that much. Jerry Glass already admitted there is no such thing as MidAtlantic, to a judge. So, we all know that MAA never exsisted. It was just something on paper...that is it. I am qualified on every a/c at U and have the same f/a manual and also in recurrent class with "mainline" f/a's..so I am mainline and the past few years at MAA should count as such. But, when we go back to "Mainline" in June or whenever not one day any of us spent here counts as longevity. For everyone that thinks that we knew...please educate yourself and you will realize we really did not.

 

[PITbull]

Maybe I'm getting old and have a bad case of skyheimers, but regardless of whether MAA was a subsiderary or part of mainline, NOBODY and I mean NOBODY put a gun to anyone's head to work for MAA....NOBODY!! The f/a's knew what they were getting into with regards to their wages and contract. Remember this was negotiated and voted on. What part of the "working at American Eagle contract" did these people not get? The f/a's that refused MAA just stayed furoughed. Regardless if THAT is true or not, the question to those furloughed US mainline f/a's is...Are you still on the US senority list? If so, you won't get a penny. Did ANYONE put a gun to your head to work at MAA...or whatever it was? NO!! You won't get a penny. Had you NOT had MAA as an alternative, what would you had done? Try to work for JBLU or SWA with the thousands trying to get on with them? Or would you had gone to another regional?

Whether it was dirty or not or whether a "mistake", the court will give you guys NOTHING because legally MAA WAS a part of mainline...kind of sorta (I contend this is how they got their Metrojet back) and yes it was typical "old" US management to be that slick, but it wasn't illegal. Twenty five aircraft out of 300 is not a high enough percentage to warrant taking the employees.

In that case, if we all got what we thought was fair, we would ALL be suing for what each of us thought was being wronged by management.

I'm sorry if I sound cold, but you are wasting money and time. Get over it. You made a choice that you KNEW you were getting into. We ALL knew!! Where were those 130 f/a's? As far as any off the street MAA folk, sorry, apply with US West. You don't have THAT much senority.

In this industry, luck many times works FOR you or AGAINST you. The former EAL/Trump fa/s were lucky ones as US bought the Shuttle knowing they had too honor the EAL senorities. Yes, many biitched about it because THEY had worked for EAL and got nothing. But there was a legal document and it LEGALLY had to be honored. So a few made out well.

If every airline employee sued on how they thought they were wrong, there would be no airline industry. Take a number kids.

I do agree with you. Unfortunately, I read the petition, there are some really gross distortions and exaggerations on the how, when, where, who. Whoever was the historian who gave the attorneys the info for them to develop a brief, it is grossly inaccurate. I am sure this will come out in a hearing if the case is not dismissed.

I had heard that the attorney had drew up a contract for those f/as who want to be part of this case, and they have to pay $100 per month for 20 years???? I heard this from one of the MAA f/as who signed the agreement. She wanted to know how she could get out of it.

I do agree, however, that some folks need to go through a suit to ensure that the company gets examined and if there was any wrong doing, it is brought out into the open. One thing that is not in the brief is that the ratification of MAA genesis and what workrules, wages, benefits they would be under was voted on by the members on the property which was included in the entire concessionary agreements of both concession #1 and #2.. There is never a time where involuntary furloughees have voting rights in our Constitution.

It is obvious to me that the fact of membership ratification did occur but is unknown to the attorneys handling the case. I suspect the historian for this lawsuit came into MAA many months after it started up and hasn't educated him/herself on the particulars. Those fa furloughees who were given an opportunity to work at MAA did not have to take the job, and remain on "recall" status as reflected in section 19 of the mainline agreement. There is no way that a judge could rule to give longevity to those furloughees who took the job at MAA rather than stay on furlough, as he would have to grant it to every single furloughee who did not accept MAA. Why? Because if the furloughees who passed this job up thought that they could collect longevity for pay purposes to carry with them back to mainline, many more would have taken the job instead of passing it. All furloughees who decided to take the job, knew this. Those who say they didn't, refuse to believe it. The company had told all the neogtiators in negotiations that they would offer jobs to involuntary fuloughess first before hiring off the street for this "lcc carrier within a carrier". It was part of the overallconcessions given. The negotiatiators wanted to make sure that their folks who were furloughed after 9/11 could get back into the industry via MAA if they chose to, and then wait for "recall" back to mainline.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I still don't get the hang up on the issue of what certificate the airplanes operated under. Regardless of whether it was under the potomac cert of the US cert, you still agreed to work "AA Eagle type" contract. If you were not comfortable with that, then you had a choice about accepting recall or not.

I'm certainly no expert on either the emb-170 pilot's or F/A's lawsuit, but would you say the same for the pilots and F/A's being recalled if they were told they were going to be working for a separate airline called "Recalled Air" and working under an "AE type contract" even though they were really going to be working for US Airways which had an existing contract?

It's my understanding that this is the gist of the lawsuit - what these folks were told was untrue, and known to be untrue by those doing the telling.

Jim

 

[fr8tmastr]

Parker could have stopped this deal! We were in BK and this deal did nothing to help this airline. Oh it did plenty for the 35+ million dollar bonuses for the wonder management in the crytal palace. Does anyone actually believe that management can throw out contracts left and right and renegotiate AC leases, but cant get out of a contract in which (at that time) no money had even changed hands? This deal was for management bonuses and that is it!

 

[xoxo]

I had heard that the attorney had drew up a contract for those f/as who want to be part of this case, and they have to pay $100 per month for 20 years???? I heard this from one of the MAA f/as who signed the agreement. She wanted to know how she could get out of it.

PITbull,
That is wrong. I do not know who that f/a is..but they are so wrong. Oh my...I would not have even done it for 100 a month. The pilots dont even put that much in. 20 years? where did they get that from..LOL...that is just too funny. It was 100 one time...that was it. then a small amount per month or what ever you could put forth. And you know that there is not time line for law suits. So, to just say 20 years is absurd.

 

[PITbull]

PITbull,
That is wrong. I do not know who that f/a is..but they are so wrong. Oh my...I would not have even done it for 100 a month. The pilots dont even put that much in. 20 years? where did they get that from..LOL...that is just too funny. It was 100 one time...that was it. then a small amount per month or what ever you could put forth. And you know that there is not time line for law suits. So, to just say 20 years is absurd.

Xo,

Wasn't sure, but that is what's out there for some who participated and are not sure what they signed. Did you sign a contract or some kind of legal paper saying you would contribute beyond the first $100?

 

[D M G]

I don't know enough about this to make a judgement as to whether the lawsuit is justified. But let's say it is. How do you justify $1.2 BILLION?

Under the provisions of a RICO lawsuit any damage awards are automatically tripled (trebled). I don't know if the $1.2 billion number mentioned is before or after being tripled though.

 

[MarkMyWords]

I'm certainly no expert on either the emb-170 pilot's or F/A's lawsuit, but would you say the same for the pilots and F/A's being recalled if they were told they were going to be working for a separate airline called "Recalled Air" and working under an "AE type contract" even though they were really going to be working for US Airways which had an existing contract?

It's my understanding that this is the gist of the lawsuit - what these folks were told was untrue, and known to be untrue by those doing the telling.

Jim

I can't really speak to the MAA situation with any type of authority either, but the entire certificte issue would have to have been resolved when the first airplane was put on the property, right? You can't bring an airplane on property under the guise of being operated on the potomac cert and then sneak it over to the US cert. At some point and time, before the arrival or the airplanes, it had to be determined that it was going to be operated by US.

As for employees being recalled to work "Recalled Air"....Let's say the company determined that they were going to do the same thing with the E-190's. They would operate as a seperate division on the mainline cert. The union and the company would have to negotiate and agree to that. Anyone accepting recall to work the E-190's would know that is what they are being recalled to do. Regardless of which certificate the airplanes are flying under.....the union allowed the flying to be flown as a seperate division. The employee accepted the recall to that position, knowing they would not be considered as being under the mainline contract.

 

[2out]

I don't know enough about this to make a judgement as to whether the lawsuit is justified. But let's say it is. How do you justify $1.2 BILLION?

xoxo and buckeye...

Thanks for bringing this up. Yes, it's a lot but from what I understand you have to have a minimum to file a federal case. What that is I don't know, and the lawyer came up with the $ numbers. Of course, they are not expecting to get that, believe me, in their hearts it's the PRINCIPLE of how they were misled by company/union. For those who say they knew, they did not, as no hardcopy contract was available until very recently (and way too late) And, I don't know anyone who voted on anything! They and the pilots believed they were under a separate operating certificate from US, that's why the lower pay/benefits were agreed to, and yes that was understood. But, when it was found out the certificate was never separate, so they were mainline all along, that's why we are having this discussion today! This group does NOT want anything like this to happen to anyone else, and I hope everyone can support their efforts! They are a wonderful, savvy group for a bunch of "juniors"

 

[LCC_#1]

LCC...,

You have no idea what you are talking about. Did you work for MAA...my guess is no..so maybe you should educate yourself before going off into a rant about it. Yes, the MAA people did know, but, they told us it was on a seperate certificate, and it would be seperate airline..not what it turned out to be. When they(management) found out they could not use the Potomac certificate for MAA that is when they should have notified us and then changed it all to mainline. These a/c are mainline a/c...they have always been. You were fooled too my friend. So, if you get a chance..have a conversation with someone who flies on these a/c. They will educate you a little more. Think of like this..when AWA gets put on the certificate..if they keep it seperate and just name them US WEST..they could keep them at their lower wages!!! WOW...sound like MAA doesnt it. Thats exactly what they did. OH, and by the way..we wont lose.

I AM educated and followed the entire process. Unlike you, I wasn't FOOL enough to buy into what the company was saying and REGARDLESS if MAA was on a single certificate or not, the pay scale and work rules were going to be similar to AE. It was N*E*G*O*T*I*A*T*E*D!!! GOT IT! AND you can go on about the senior this and the senior that, but the CONTRACT was passed. You actually BELIEVED that bunk about one certificate?. WOW!! Maybe YOU should had been more educated on the history of US Airways management. How cullable. The company would had gotten their little Metrojet in disguise anyway possible..I would guess by more threats..so nothing would had stopped it.

And remember that the ONLY reason the company kept MAA on the same certificate was because the process would delay putting those aircraft in service. If they came to you and said eventually you would be a seperate certificate, again, you were cullable.

I agree 100% that the e170 should have always been a mainline aircraft. At the time, many felt that his would help the company. I felt the decision was a mistake. And it was, but this is not the issue. You guys feel victimized. Well, BLANCHE, you were no more victimized than the rest of the 28,000 US East employees who watched stupid after stupid wasteful decision being made and money being piissed away on overpaid CEO's...but of course you wouldn't know this as I take it your senority is around 6 or less years? Maybe you need to sit down and talk to one of those senior mamas about how the screwd up past of US and how you should trust about a thimble amount of what is told to you.


To even insinuate that Doug Parker would somehow pull the same thing with the merger or that he was involved in some scheme to do such shows that you and your little club of victims need to lay off the booze and get a life.

When all the facts are presented, you will walk out of the courtroom with another person to blame for your victimization......da judge!!

 

[2out]

I'm certainly no expert on either the emb-170 pilot's or F/A's lawsuit, but would you say the same for the pilots and F/A's being recalled if they were told they were going to be working for a separate airline called "Recalled Air" and working under an "AE type contract" even though they were really going to be working for US Airways which had an existing contract?

It's my understanding that this is the gist of the lawsuit - what these folks were told was untrue, and known to be untrue by those doing the telling.

Jim

THANK YOU BoeingBoy-you hit it right on the head perfectly and more simply than I could have explained! Thanks....

 

[BoeingBoy]

As for employees being recalled to work "Recalled Air"....Let's say the company determined that they were going to do the same thing with the E-190's. They would operate as a seperate division on the mainline cert. The union and the company would have to negotiate and agree to that. Anyone accepting recall to work the E-190's would know that is what they are being recalled to do.

And that's apparently just what didn't happen with the Emb-170's/MDA - at least with ALPA. The company and union knew the planes were to be operated on the mainline certificate but kept up the pretense that MDA was a stand-alone carrier. With ALPA, at least, the pretense continued beyond the point where MDA even existed as a separate corporate entity operating on the mainline certificate.

So while there never was a seperate airline called Mid-Atlantic, and even after the separate corporate entity ceased to exist, the affected employees were told they worked for a separate company under a separate contract.

You're right about one thing, at least as it pertains to ALPA - the union knew that the "170 division" wasn't really a separate airline when it started operations. Not divulging that to the affected pilots and even actively promoting the pretense that it was a separate airline is why ALPA is named in the pilot's lawsuit. Presumably, the same is true for the F/A's suit.

Like some have posted, I have my own doubts that anyone will get anything out of this except the lawyers. As PineyBob said, the company and unions can outlast the individuals that were mislead.

That doesn't make what happened to the affected people right, for their situation was really no different from Metrojet or even the Shuttle after it was bought and merged into US mainline. Neither of those groups was told they worked for a different company and had to accept a completely different contract. Chances are that the unions would have raised cain if the company had attempted anything like that. Why the unions didn't once they knew that the 170's wouldn't be operated by a completely separate airline is beyond me, but that's for them to explain in court if it ever gets that far.

 

[LCC_#1]

xoxo and buckeye...

They are a wonderful, savvy group for a bunch of "juniors"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!

Now that's a good one!! CULLABLE!!


Your post seems to incline that the contracts came AFTER the organization of MAA.

Where I WILL blame the unions is that they should had negotiated a timeline for the seperate certificate, but to hold them financially liable because you actually BELIEVED them? No way.

Wow, I guess I found a new career if I'm the only one who saw what was going on. Step aside, Miss Cleo, you have competition.