Non-Rev Boarding

[john john]

Retirees picket outside American Airlines HQs over travel benefits
As retirees like to point out, the employee who had worked at American six months would have higher priority than the one that had worked there 40 years, but had retired.
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2014/08/retirees-picket-outside-american-airlines-hqs-over-travel-benefits.html/

 

[IORFA]

If you look at the poll here,  the difference between DOH and FCFS is  5!  Hardly what I would call "a few" .

Problem is that there are very few employees on here. The poll is not representative of anything accurate. Plus, non employees are able to vote as well. You'll survive and if not, I'll appreciate the increased ability of getting on a flight without you trying.

 

[jimntx]

Retirees picket outside American Airlines HQs over travel benefits
As retirees like to point out, the employee who had worked at American six months would have higher priority than the one that had worked there 40 years, but had retired.
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2014/08/retirees-picket-outside-american-airlines-hqs-over-travel-benefits.html/

They had better leave well enough alone.  The IRS has agreed with the airlines that non-rev travel for employees and retirees is a granted benefit--just a nicety that the company has given out of the goodness of its heart.  Granted benefits are taxed at a different rate than earned benefits.  IIRC, earned benefits are taxed as earned income.  The company portion of my non-contributory pension from the oil company (I contributed to my pension plan, but it wasn't required) is taxed as income at my current rate.  Since I left the oil company before the days of pre-tax/after tax deductions, all of my contributions had already been taxed.

 

[eolesen]

Jim, don't go introducing logic into the equation. It hasn't worked before.

 

[jimntx]

True.  In fact, I think it's a Rule 32 violation now.  Using logic is the same as talkin' dirty.

 

[john john]

Perhaps a Granted DOH benefit my a Arbitrator

 

[MCI transplant]

They had better leave well enough alone.  The IRS has agreed with the airlines that non-rev travel for employees and retirees is a granted benefit--just a nicety that the company has given out of the goodness of its heart.  Granted benefits are taxed at a different rate than earned benefits.  IIRC, earned benefits are taxed as earned income.  The company portion of my non-contributory pension from the oil company (I contributed to my pension plan, but it wasn't required) is taxed as income at my current rate.  Since I left the oil company before the days of pre-tax/after tax deductions, all of my contributions had already been taxed.

Well, if they taxed them, they would have to tax all! ---- Now that would be a same!

 

[jimntx]

And, that is exactly the risk you run when you start yammering that you EARNED the benefit, whether it's free travel or free Springalator shoes.  If it's earned, it's income to the IRS.  And income is taxable.
 
We all seem to have lost sight of the footnote that has been in the travel book since day 1 I imagine.  That footnote points out that the terms and the policy of the non-rev travel program can be changed by the company at any time for any reason.  I'm afraid that the US Airways side of the house--you know, the ones that "have a certain travel policy in their contract"--are going to find that will last until a new joint contract for the equal unions on each side of the house is ratified.  I venture to predict that the new joint contracts--whether for f/as, pilots, or mechanics--will have no such provisions for non-rev travel.
 
So, if what some on the US Airways side of the house has said about DP's ability to drag out a grievance to the last possible moment is true, winning the grievance will be a Pyrrhic victory.

 

[AANOTOK]

Here are the changes...even for the US crew! 700...comment?
 
http://twu514.org/blog/2014/08/28/travel-changes-that-will-take-effect-september-2014/

 

[700UW]

You do realize the AFA has already an arbitration and is awaiting the decision and the IAM and CWA also are going to arbitration on it, but will wait till the AFA case gets ruled on.

 

[AANOTOK]

Yep, and in the meantime FCFS and probably that way afterwards (especially) when it is non contractual next time around.

 

[bigjets]

Non rev travel is perk not a benefit/right. Say thank you and get on the plane. If you're a commuter remember nobody cares, move to your base or quit complaining it was your choice. Non travel is not a constitutional right.

You'll are starting to sound like pax who complain that air travel cost too much. Remember when we had more legroom through out cabin and people still went to SWA for $3 dollar cheaper ticket.

 

[CactusPilot1]

You do realize the AFA has already an arbitration and is awaiting the decision and the IAM and CWA also are going to arbitration on it, but will wait till the AFA case gets ruled on.

So......what? Meanwhile, boarding will be FCFS.

 

[jimntx]

You do realize the AFA has already an arbitration and is awaiting the decision and the IAM and CWA also are going to arbitration on it, but will wait till the AFA case gets ruled on.

Yes, you keep reminding us every hour on the hour.  You do realize that AFA will NOT be the surviving flight attendant union.  You do realize that a team of AA and US flight attendants are currently working on developing a joint contract to cover all flight attendants in the new AA.  You do realize that the new joint contract has zero to nil chance of having a "non-rev boarding by seniority" clause in it.  Don't you?  Or, are you still lost in your own little world that tells you that the US Airways contracts are unbreakable and eternal.
 
Even if AFA wins the arbitration hands down, boarding by seniority only applies to flights on current US metal (which is what is currently happening) and ONLY until the new joint contract is ratified.  May I remind you that the PIT f/as almost caused the loss of non-rev reciprocal benefits on WN after the PIT base closed by demanding that WN (which also boards by FCFS) gate agents board them by seniority on the flights to their new base in PHL because their contract required it?  They didn't seem to understand that their contract only applied to flights on their airline.  I heard some of the senior ladies got rather strident at the gate podium in PIT, and I was told by a friend who is a pilot with Southwest that Southwest wrote a letter to US saying that the f/as would have to cease and desist or the reciprocal travel agreement would be at an end.

 

[700UW]

You do realize that the PMUS CBA is in full effect and will be until a JCBA is negotiated and ratified, so if the AFA wins, it will be DOH.
 
Would you care to throw the kitchen sink into your post?
 
Nothing about PIT FAs have anything to do with CBA and its language which is a federal binding contract under the RLA.