SWA will not cut pay to increase profits

[ramper_in_las]

If a supervisor flies any position but "D" then I agree grieve it. The only way I can see a flight supervisor working a position other than "D" is if the F/A who was scheduled to work that position gets pulled with full pay, not to fill a vacancy. I still don't see the problem with them flying "D" with a full F/A crew.

I don't think the problem is flying "d". I think the problem is when management fills the "d" spot and fulfills F/A duties. Look I love working at Southwest as a whole. From My perspective the tide is changing. The good ole days are gone. Everything has become about the bottom line. I understand why it has to be this way. Do I like it?, no. That being said, all of us as employees have rules to follow. We don't follow those rules we ultimately face termination. On that same note the company signed contracts with its employees and the company should be held to the same standards and follow the contractual rules. It has become us against them kind of environment but with some of the choices the company has made in the past couple of years (as noted on some of my past threads) has become detrimental to many of the union work groups. The grievance process is the way we collectively voice our opinions and it seems its the only way the company listens.

It absolutely kills me how unionized Employees are being told to decline help to do their jobs. :down: The silent elephant in the room is going to start trumpeting its horn soon...

Hey we all have to feed our families, It is especially difficult when your first starting out as an employee of WN and management is filling positions that could have been filled with OT.

 

[orangeman]

It absolutely kills me how unionized Employees are being told to decline help to do their jobs. :down: The silent elephant in the room is going to start trumpeting its horn soon...

It IS NOT about a friendly sup "helping out". First, as stated before, they are not "active, working F/A's. Many have NEVER gone through initial F/A training! This a blatant violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement that we have signed with the company. They offer to pass out drinks etc. and generally "get in the way" and slow down service as they are "learning our job". Hey, if you are my supervisor, shouldn't you know and have already performed my duties? This is just a management (against CBA) way of trying to get their troops out online before contract negotiations open in '08. "Trojan Horse '07" if you will. Yes it could end up costing local 556 jobs with sups flying. Regardless, it is against a contract signed by both parties! Not to mention those inflight sups don't have the training or experience! Don't get me started about them blocking the 4th jumpseat for commuters or other employees so they can ride around and be told "no thanks I got it covered".

 

[wnbubbleboy]

Don't get me started about them blocking the 4th jumpseat for commuters or other employees so they can ride around and be told "no thanks I got it covered".

I don't follow you?

 

[orangeman]

I don't follow you?

Meaning they (inflight sups) scheduled as a working "D" f/a will offer to help and or do some of your work but we can and will say "No Thanks". So they will ride around for a few flights doing nothing yet blocking 4th. They can also choose which flights. How convenient if they need to get somewhere and the flight is already sold out.

This is just one more of many contract violations that have been added to the list of grievances. :down: :down: :down:

 

[wnbubbleboy]

Meaning they will offer to help and or do some of your work but we can and will say "No Thanks". So they will ride around for a few flights doing nothing yet blocking 4th. They can also choose which flights. How convenient if they need to get somewhere and the flight is already sold out.

This is just one more of many contract violations that have been added to the list of grievances. :down: :down: :down:

Listen Carefully, what your saying is the beginning of the end of this company. Christ, with the Contract Violations, Give me a break. Nobody really wants to "endanger" your job by flying forth. They just want to get from point A to Point B for work or pleasure. Nothing to do with you or your job.

We are all employees who are in it this together. I have worked PROVO/RAMP/MX I know the aircraft as well as you do.

I am not trying to be mean spirited or minimize the work you do. I know it's hard, I couldn't do it. I admire your temperament for it.

With that being said, get the forth up and have them work for you. It's not everyday someone out of your work group gets to hand out peanuts. That is one the special things about this company, take it a way and you could be working for any other Brand X airline.

Who wants to do that.

 

[orangeman]

I would have to agree with the 556 leaders. If your riding fourth (D) we all are encouraged to assist with some duties but not to do their job. Its not a matter of "its not my job" but the union doing what it is supposed to and protecting the already existing jobs.

Riding the 4th Jumpseat position is not the same as an Inflight supervisor being scheduled (against our contract) as the D position flight attendant. D position is paid as a "working f/a". An inflight sup is not a certified f/a! If another employee f/a or not is nonreving on the J/S they are not considered a "working crewmember" and must abide by the seatbelt sign. WN petitioned the FAA to get an exemption for the "D" f/a position (filled by sups) to be exempt from the seatbelt sign restrictions and it was granted. The FAA couldn't care less about the signed CBA that prohibits this practice. Sorry I didn't see the common use between "4th or J/S rider" and "D" f/a before as they are totally different and the "D" is a working crewmember who must be a f/a. If a nonrev of any department is riding in the 4th (never previously scheduled) jumpseat position, it does not mean they are the 4th working "D" position flight attendant. Big difference! They are just allowed to sit there as an active WN employee on a first come basis after being briefed how to open the door etc. in an unplanned emergency.

Thanks for your patience B)

Oh yah, whenever an employee is nonreving on 4th and the seatbelt sign is off, an offer to help with peanuts etc. is ALWAYS welcome, even if we don't take you up on it.

Listen Carefully, what your saying is the beginning of the end of this company. Christ, with the Contract Violations, Give me a break. Nobody really wants to "endanger" your job by flying forth. They just want to get from point A to Point B for work or pleasure. Nothing to do with you or your job.

Bubbleboy,
Please refer to my previous post and realize that I wasn't aware that 4th and "D" f/a (sup being paid) were being used interchangeably until then. My bad or I would have understood the confusion earlier. I hope you understand my point better now as that a contractually "illegal" inflight sup is blocking the jumpseat from you as well and an offer of help from you or any other employee with that "Warrior Spirit" is always appreciated!!!

Cheers!

 

[orangeman]

If a supervisor flies any position but "D" then I agree grieve it. The only way I can see a flight supervisor working a position other than "D" is if the F/A who was scheduled to work that position gets pulled with full pay, not to fill a vacancy. I still don't see the problem with them flying "D" with a full F/A crew.

Because it is completely against a negotiated, signed, legally binding contract.If they wanted to allow a "D" f/a then it has to be another f/a, not a supervisor with limited or NO experience. Coincidentaly just before contract negotiations start to ramp up. Other grievances now in arbitration deal with the meanings of "all", "immediately" and "total".

Kinda reminds me of a former Chief Executive debating the meaning of "is". :down: :down: :down:

 

[wnbubbleboy]

Bubbleboy,
Please refer to my previous post and realize that I wasn't aware that 4th and "D" f/a (sup being paid) were being used interchangeably until then. My bad or I would have understood the confusion earlier. I hope you understand my point better now as that a contractually "illegal" inflight sup is blocking the jumpseat from you as well and an offer of help from you or any other employee with that "Warrior Spirit" is always appreciated!!!

Cheers!

Got it, I see your point about about the supervisors. I Heard the same thing voiced by some flight attendant freinds here in BWI. I hear it's Slam/Click when they're on the trips, not a good way to build good will.

 

[brown]

Listen Carefully, what your saying is the beginning of the end of this company. Christ, with the Contract Violations, Give me a break. Nobody really wants to "endanger" your job by flying forth. They just want to get from point A to Point B for work or pleasure. Nothing to do with you or your job.

We are all employees who are in it this together. I have worked PROVO/RAMP/MX I know the aircraft as well as you do.

I am not trying to be mean spirited or minimize the work you do. I know it's hard, I couldn't do it. I admire your temperament for it.

With that being said, get the forth up and have them work for you. It's not everyday someone out of your work group gets to hand out peanuts. That is one the special things about this company, take it a way and you could be working for any other Brand X airline.

Who wants to do that.

Easy on the Kool-aid

 

[KCFlyer]

They offer to pass out drinks etc. and generally "get in the way" and slow down service as they are "learning our job". Hey, if you are my supervisor, shouldn't you know and have already performed my duties?

Interesting point. In all my years of flying, I have never been told that I may be called upon to serve cokes. But I have been told that I may be called upon to help evacuate the aircraft, and my only 'training' has been putting my butt in a seat in the exit row. Because I've never been trained in the evacuation of an aircraft, would I not be "getting in the way" while "learning your job"? Shouldn't Thom consider lobbying for a change that says the exit row seats can only be occupied by an FA or someone else that has been trained in the evacuation of the aircraft? In all honesty - if someone was going to get in the way, I'd prefer it result in a delay in getting my drink rather than a delay in exiting a burning aircraft.

 

[wnbubbleboy]

Easy on the Kool-aid

Hey, sorry, I like the company I work for most of the time.

Been here 14 years and started at 6.50 an hour just for the chance to work for Herb. Have been injured several times doing my job (So you can say I bled for this company). There are days where I hate this place and days I love it.

With that being said stick that KoolAid far enough up until it meets your screen name.

 

[orangeman]

Interesting point. In all my years of flying, I have never been told that I may be called upon to serve cokes. But I have been told that I may be called upon to help evacuate the aircraft, and my only 'training' has been putting my butt in a seat in the exit row. Because I've never been trained in the evacuation of an aircraft, would I not be "getting in the way" while "learning your job"? Shouldn't Thom consider lobbying for a change that says the exit row seats can only be occupied by an FA or someone else that has been trained in the evacuation of the aircraft? In all honesty - if someone was going to get in the way, I'd prefer it result in a delay in getting my drink rather than a delay in exiting a burning aircraft.

KC,
Come on now. First off, I mentioned that this is a blatant contract violation. If I violate the contract I am disciplined or worse. Next, if you are asked to assist in an emergency and agree, Thank You! Many will not. The problem with the sup assigned to fly "D" position is that they may not have gone through any inflight training at all. They could easily have less ability than you! 99% of the time there won't be any emergency and they are still "just in the way". So, they could delay you in "getting your drink" and or pose "a delay in exiting a burning aircraft".

Either way, they should not be assigned a working position, period

Bye the way, thanks for supporting common sense against Bussie, Mags and the like!

Bye the bye, if exit row seats are "primary" exits they are manned by employees with evac training. They could have an assistant that would have to be "Johnny on the spot" in a worse case scenario. If you are seated in the over wing exit, this is considered a "secondary" exit, but hey, in any emergency use whatever is best.

 

[HPMGR1]

Interesting discussion. It reminds me of a Station Manager's meeting many years ago. A group of Manager's where complaining about some issue with Travel Agents. Gary Barron had stopped in for a while to say hello. After listening to it for 10 minutes or so, he stood up and said "If this is all you have to worry about and talk about, then we all might as well go home" Wise words and seems like they apply on the subject of the D F/A

 

[Rhino]

Orangeman, you're clueless.

1) SWA OWNS the 4th seat. They can do with it what they want. Your assertions re CBA violations are utter nonsense.

2) The only folks who should have any fear re this issue are those few SWA FAs who are too lazy to do the the jobs they are well compensated to do. You sound like you fall into that category.

 

[bigbusdrvr]

NHBB - There IS a difference between small or no raises, and cuts in pay and benefits.

-----------------------------------------------------

There is a difference between "No cut in pay, due to reduced profits, and "we must cut pay to stop losses".....

Your all shareholders right?