Non Rev policies after merger?

From the CWA contract:


Article 8 – Seniority
A. Date of Hire Seniority is defined as continuous US Airways, Inc. service
in any department. Date of Hire Seniority is applied to:
a. Vacation accrual
b. boarding for on-line non-revenue space available travel


Cool.... that means that US Airways was really in a quagmire there with the bennies... That's a CSR contract.... Pre merger or post?



I GOT IT...

I looked at that Contract and it looks like it was Pre merger....

See???? This is what I always used to point out - of how plain and clear a contract can be... I like how the CWA specified in this contract that it was SENIORITY for Non-REV Benefits...

Compare that to the vague language from the expert contract drafters at AFA66 above. I mean.... "current Company policy" Seriously? Could you be a bit more specific? What does CURRENT mean? Current now when this was written or Current whenever the person reads it in the future?

"......shall not be reduced or discontinued...." ???? REALLY but it can be changed, correct? What does reduce mean from your perspective?

Just goes to show how many giant holes the AFA66 F/A 1999 contract had... Written by the people who had no clue...
 
ContUNITEus & others. I guess I just choose to be positive. I don't believe they will combine the worst of both but if that's how you feel, go with it.
 
I agree with black magic, I'm sure that policy will be changed and it makes sense from an operational issue. Why have a retired person bump an employee trying to get to work
 
The prices quoted by Jim include all the governmental taxes and charges, and airport fees. With 25 years seniority, Y international travel is free at AA. The airline gets to keep none of $174.20 he quoted for the DFW-LHR-DFW round trip.


Wow lets still hope they go to the US policy of 100 each way for first class to Europe
 
I agree with black magic, I'm sure that policy will be changed and it makes sense from an operational issue. Why have a retired person bump an employee trying to get to work
You are assuming a retired person is doing nothing but lying around with tons of free time. I retired in 2005 and still work 30 plus hours a week. Most of us had to get jobs for benefits not to mention just day to day expenses. We are "new hires" at our new jobs and don't get a lot of vacation time so it IS precious to us. I agree with the person that said we put our time in the trenches. The part about most of the newer employees wouldn't have a job if it hadn't been for us, sounds sort of arrogant. A lot of retirees don't fly that much anymore anyways. If we put 25 plus years in, we have BEEN to a lot of places already. In my 33 plus years, I think I could count the number of times I was bumped by a retiree on one hand. Every group is going to have valid reasons for their point of view. I would vote FCFS if it gets me on a level playing field with everyone else, if not, then I would vote for seniority. I have a smart phone and can check in no matter where I am now.
 
Whichever policy will generate more revenue is the one they will use.

If the company does not generate revenue how would you get paid? Shouldn't we prioritize revenue generating activities?
 
Hopefully the retirees will be put back in the mix of either doh or fcfs and not pushed to the bottom like an after thought. Commuters made a choice where to live. If your job moved, you still made a choice where to live. If my job moves I move with it or don't have a job. No, you should not board first to get to work before other non revs. Your contract has language to address stuck commuting. Use that, or move. Thinking you are entitled to board first to get to work is ludicrous.
 
I choose to live in base. They closed my base and made me commute. Sorry I'm not selfish to pull my kids ou of school at this point and move. I'm not worried because I will bet m raise that retired pass riders will be sa4
 
. It's a different world now. Airplanes are 100% full. You had time to enjoy the golden age of air travel. Let us enjoy what you sacrificed for. After all, where there was sacrifice there was selling out. You only have to look at the pay to start out now. I have 10,000 hrs but Starting pay is $35k. I'm sure you didn't start at the majors with 10,000 hrs.

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=1.&year1=1980&year2=2012
 
And if it wasnt thru the Hard Work and sacrifices of the Retirees, You wouldnt have a job?
So those that have been through multiple bankruptcies and furloughs haven't sacrificed as much as someone who retired before those happened? The current pay rates have significantly less buying power than in the past. Don't get on a soapbox and tell us of your sacrifices when many of us have sacrificed as much, or more, over the course of our careers. When those of us that are here now retire, we should get bumped down the list and I will say the same thing when that happens.
 
If the company does not generate revenue how would you get paid? Shouldn't we prioritize revenue generating activities?
Generating revenue from something touted as a "benefit" "given to" employees and family members , should not be a priority.
 
you know , i'm not sure anymore which is the better non rev policy ...someone made a good point to me about how everyone might try to check in 4 hours ahead of time from their iphone ... or something like that ...

at first i was scared at the thought of merging with AA because they all started when the earth was first created ....

but then i thought about when we merged with US Air and went with their non-rev policy , and again i was scared because those guys had been here since this country was first established ...

but you know what i realize ... the longer you work for this company , the less on average people tend to fly ...so really high senority isn't a huge threat ...
 

Latest posts

Back
Top