Profit Sharing Almost Definite..

[Itestwell]

Look, we know you all suffered back east under the old days of USAir.

I understand that.

But, damn, are you ever gonna get over it and move forward?

Yeah, life sucked, and you almost shut down which would have been real bad.

But there is an airline, there is a future, but if you carry around all your victimhood and anger, the airline has no chance, because nothing will ever be good enough.

I'm sorry life sucked, we get it at HP, we heard it a million times, focus on a positive future instead of constantly complaining about the past.

Its just a job

Correct, East suffered previously. Are you going to say that HP, the lowest paid in the industry since its *inception* due to a revenue lacking route structure, did NOT suffer???

We are not trying to make it W v E, we are simply saying that West should have received their own negotiated form of reward/ profit sharing in the deal, instead of enjoying our share which was extracted over 3, yes 3, concessionary contracts. It comes down to a lack of spine on the part of our MECP, nothing to do with the rank and file FA on East or West. Please do not misunderstand the direction of frustration.

Please point out the point that you're pointing to.

Does that help?

 

[N903AW]

Hopefully, the west can hear this. We are not mad that you are geting profit sharing, just that you are getting part of "our" profit sharing, that's all.
Hp, we are trying to get over it, and that profit sharing check was part of it. Yes, there is an airline, yes, there is a future. Maybe you could just buy us a few beers after the integration and we could call it even.

Quid pro quo. The Flight Attendants on the West side also gave up Section 6 with our renewable contract to allow the East into the contract negotiations, too. If we hadn't done so, you probably would have kept your profit sharing and been on your concessionary contract until 2012.

I have gotten over that and moved on because what's done is done.

 

[Itestwell]

Quid pro quo. The Flight Attendants on the West side also gave up Section 6 with our renewable contract to allow the East into the contract negotiations, too. If we hadn't done so, you probably would have kept your profit sharing and been on your concessionary contract until 2012.

I have gotten over that and moved on because what's done is done.

I disagree. You do not think we would have had a merged contract before 2012? Highly unlikely. And weren't you in Section 6 for awhile before the merger was anounced?

 

[PITbull]

Quid pro quo. The Flight Attendants on the West side also gave up Section 6 with our renewable contract to allow the East into the contract negotiations, too. If we hadn't done so, you probably would have kept your profit sharing and been on your concessionary contract until 2012.

I have gotten over that and moved on because what's done is done.

Not correct.

The West section 6 negotiations has been "suspended" according to the mediator. The discussions currently have to do with intergrating provisions from both current West agreement and current East agreement.

This is part of the merger process and all groups from both sides are negotiating.

 

[Travelpro72]

Quid pro quo. The Flight Attendants on the West side also gave up Section 6 with our renewable contract to allow the East into the contract negotiations, too. If we hadn't done so, you probably would have kept your profit sharing and been on your concessionary contract until 2012.

I have gotten over that and moved on because what's done is done.

I don't think thats quite accurate. As a matter of fact MANY on the east wanted you to get your section 6 negotiations together before we started the process of negotiating a joint contract for all. So that holds NO water. Bottom line is we negotiated profit sharing in our concessionary rounds and our MECP without asking ANY of the east flight attendants included the west f/a's into the pool. Now I wanna be one group and have equality for all but this was ours that we fought for. It's nothing personal against ANY of our flying brothers and sisters out west. Again, flip the table and you'd be VERY upset.

 

[Whatnow?]

I too agree that the west should recieve profit sharing in the future....just not this one. This profit sharing was agreed to by all union members in return for the drastic cuts in pay and work concessions to pull the Airline out of BK. AWA employees gave nothing to recieve this and weren't even included in the concessionary agreements back then. Now with that said, in future contracts and negotiations, they DEFINATELY should be included. It was a gesture of good faith to include the west side in on this round of profit sharing....but I really don't think it was needed. Most East F/A's STILL don't know about sharing the profits with the west.....when they find out they aren't at all pleased! It's not a question of which side is working harder to make the Airline profitable right now.....it's part of an agreement to the East employees for giving up blood, sweat, and tears back in dire times! JMO

 

[N903AW]

I disagree. You do not think we would have had a merged contract before 2012? Highly unlikely. And weren't you in Section 6 for awhile before the merger was anounced?

We were in Section 6 for awhile, but we had made more progress with negotiations than current "integrated" negotiations which are moving at a slug's pace. I think the only thing that AFA and the Company have agreed upon is the color of the cover (please note sarcasm here).

As Pitbull mentions, yes the mediator suspended Section 6. The issue is moot. What I am saying is if we had not moved for a "combined" contract, you would probably have kept your full profit sharing plan as negotiated with CCY. We on the West side of things would have gotten the scraps or nothing at all. Ask anyone from Fleet Service on the West side about that one.

 

[Travelpro72]

Whats done is done. I don't think that anyone here at east is mad at any of our fellow west employees. It's not your fault. Our MECP did this. QUESTION???? Does anyone know what Mike Flores answer is when asked why he made the decision he did? Again folks, it's not that we don't want to share or feel that the west didn't have a part in our company profit. We just gave a ship load of dough $$ and THIS was our way of getting a little something back. Now its less than it should have been. Profit sharing for ALL in the new negotiated contract is what should have been done.

 

[N903AW]

Whats done is done. I don't think that anyone here at east is mad at any of our fellow west employees. It's not your fault. Our MECP did this.

Just so you know, Mike Flores doesn't hold a very high regard from most of us on the West side, either. East and West definitely are unified on that. B)

 

[Informed1]

Whats done is done. I don't think that anyone here at east is mad at any of our fellow west employees. It's not your fault. Our MECP did this. QUESTION???? Does anyone know what Mike Flores answer is when asked why he made the decision he did? Again folks, it's not that we don't want to share or feel that the west didn't have a part in our company profit. We just gave a ship load of dough $$ and THIS was our way of getting a little something back. Now its less than it should have been. Profit sharing for ALL in the new negotiated contract is what should have been done.

It had to do with the transition agreement. The full text of the e-line that was sent out can be found at www.afausairways.org. If I remember correctly, the west MEC would not negotiate a transition agreement that protected east flying until complete integration without something. Profit sharing was all the east had to give. It also had something to do with offering new hire opportunities on the west to furloughed east flight attendants. Again, it is all in the eline.

 

[hublablebla]

I too agree that the west should recieve profit sharing in the future....just not this one. This profit sharing was agreed to by all union members in return for the drastic cuts in pay and work concessions to pull the Airline out of BK. AWA employees gave nothing to recieve this and weren't even included in the concessionary agreements back then.

Please keep in mind that you came down from your lofty perch and settled where we always were. As a westie, I have never had a chance to make the good money you easties did. If I was able to make what you guys were making in the 90's and early 00's, I would certainly be in a much better financial situation right now....That being said, I would like to say that you all have made sacrificies on the east, and you do deserve better. Hopefully there is a way we can achieve our goals together. There isn't much of an alternative. Our fates are tied together now. We can get a lot more done by supporting each other and working toward our common goal.

If you feel cheated by the company about the profit sharing pool, by all means, file a lawsuit and good luck. Maybe they would be open to renegotiating the transition agreement

 

[N109UW]

West without the East= No Profits
East without the West= No Profits

We did this together.

Grow up children

Your right, maybe we should include the westies in our sick concession also. How does deduct 100%, pay you 70% sound. We have others, why stop at profit sharing. How about 1/2 pay, no credit on deadheads. We have more. want some of them? I didn't think so.

 

[N903AW]

It had to do with the transition agreement. The full text of the e-line that was sent out can be found at www.afausairways.org. If I remember correctly, the west MEC would not negotiate a transition agreement that protected east flying until complete integration without something. Profit sharing was all the east had to give. It also had something to do with offering new hire opportunities on the west to furloughed east flight attendants. Again, it is all in the eline.

If I were an East Flight Attendant I would be upset as well. Anything that was previously negotiated and agreed upon in your concessions should have gone to the membership first for a vote. Plain and simple. Mike F. sold you out.

 

[Elevation]

Correct, East suffered previously. Are you going to say that HP, the lowest paid in the industry since its *inception* due to a revenue lacking route structure, did NOT suffer???

We are not trying to make it W v E, we are simply saying that West should have received their own negotiated form of reward/ profit sharing in the deal, instead of enjoying our share which was extracted over 3, yes 3, concessionary contracts. It comes down to a lack of spine on the part of our MECP, nothing to do with the rank and file FA on East or West. Please do not misunderstand the direction of frustration.
Does that help?

Ah, that the East and West should be treated differently! Combined contracts, senority list and all request that both sides be treated the same except for... $ . You can't have it both ways.

I think you need to reinvent you thought process.

 

[gaucho99]

I'm a little bit confused. As a west employee, what I'm hearing is East employes had a contract for profit sharing, while west did not. The contract was made before the merger but East employees are expecting to not only profit from the old US Airways, but the old HP too?

It would seem to me, that if you do not include the west employees in the sharing, then you should calculate the amount to be shared from what the old US Airways would have made had their not been a merger. Which would have been zero. Granted, the east operations created a profit but it would not have been possible w/o the synergies created by the merger.

Or, you could look at east operational profit and share that with east employees and west operational profit and share that with west employees. But as it stands now, I don't buy the claim that west is taking part of the east profit sharing because part of that profit came from the west.