hp_fa
Veteran
- Feb 19, 2004
- 3,290
- 178
firstamendment said:Just know where your place is.[post="311878"][/post]
EXCUSE ME?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
firstamendment said:Just know where your place is.[post="311878"][/post]
hp_fa said:EXCUSE ME?
[post="311882"][/post]
So what do you consider a relative bid position? I currently have nearly 20 yrs at Ueast, I am on reserve in my base because of the downsizing in that particular base. Are you saying that is all I deserve to ever be able to hold because of the "relative seniority"? Is it my fault at Ueast we have a choice of 6 bases and the base I fly out of is being downsized dramatically, has pushed me down to reserve bidding? What is the fairness of a AWA f/a with less then 20 yrs being considered senior to me? You cannot be given seniority you haven't accurred.luvn737s said:Suppose the airline is 61 years old (like AA) and is much larger (like AA)?
While they may not remain junior forever, they also may never accrue meaningful seniority over their remaining career because they're stuck behind someone who got hired at an airline that stagnated.
With 2 airlines of relatively the same age and seniority, a reasonable person would say DOH is equitable. In this case is patently is not. Both employee groups should retain their relative bidding positions, as would be the case under the first scenario above. Reasonable people can find a fair compromise, while others have no problem with 2 or more wrongs making a right (as long as the "wrong" in question doesn't affect them). The legend of the "wrong" perpetrated by some for a short-term gain will live on long after the merger and every new-hire going forward is sure to be indoctrinated.
Now is the time to choose a solution everyone can live with for a long time to come.
[post="310931"][/post]
^5 girl, come on over, the party is just getting started!desertgal said:OK, I'm also here laffin my ### off at some of these posts, but then I am brought back to earth when I remember I am a former HP FA.
AND, I am embarrassed I have to ask, cuz usually I consider myself well-informed;
What is the deal with the DVD? Is it something afa66 sent to USeast members?
I clicked a link to see the video, but the estimated download was 1hr 15min, so forget that. (I have dial-up)
I read my updates from afa66, but don't remember seing anything about a DVD.
Please, PLEASE, I have mentioned this before, PLEASE don't assume that ALL HP FAs are big seniority cry babies!
I seriously doubt the BOD will go for changing the policy, but if they did, I'm not sure I would be entirely comfortable with the 'free' seniority.
I can't imagine it would be too pleasent working with one or more east FAs who were 'robbed' of their seniority.
And, put me on the list for CLT. When my kids are big, I'm outta here!
A 20yr fence on PHX would NOT be to my benefit.
AND furthermore, I do not want to wait 20years before I can fly with US east folks!
I'm actually EXCITED to be part of a 'big' multi-base, international carrier.
[post="311022"][/post]
That is the whole reason that AWA flight attendants voted in AFA to begin with: no one wanted a "subjective" set of rules. Isn't that correct?Shane on all of you for you childish responses... the only one that had any substance depth or resoponse is pitbull and multitaskers. The whole point of changing the DOH is so there isn't a permanent formula in place... so it can be tailored to each individual merger because from here on out they are most likely to unique like this one. If you were in our position you would try and do everything that was fair for your side. You would also have the same anxiety that we have after reading countelss hotlines from Mr. Evil Mike Flores who seems not to care about anything or anyone. Sure let's debate the topic but to ridicule and make fun ... not good!
So just because something is not subjective, that makes it good?That is the whole reason that AWA flight attendants voted in AFA to begin with: no one wanted a "subjective" set of rules. Isn't that correct?
This is precisely why date of hire is the only fair way--it is NOT subjective. Someone is always going to feel that whatever rule there is (and it doesn't matter what the scenario is), that it is not "fair". Whenever a subjective element is involved, it is subject to opinion and prejudice, which do not belong in the picture. This whole "relative seniority integration" is only opening up a can of worms that NO ONE would want.
So just because something is not subjective, that makes it good?
A straight staple job (either stapling HP behind U or vice versa) is not subjective either. So aren't either of those alternatives just as valid as DOH? DOH isn't the "only" non-subjective way to do it.
A subjective set of rules is easier to administer, that is for sure. But it also can be seen as monolithic and as not adequately taking valid concerns into consideration.
I have been clear throughout that I agree that in the end it will be done DOH, because that is what the rules state.Bear
Whether one agrees with what you are saying or not, the game is now over. The rules were in play.
I have been clear throughout that I agree that in the end it will be done DOH, because that is what the rules state.
I am just providing a counterpoint to those who say DOH is the ONLY fair way to do it. It's not. And the ex-HP F/As will end up with the short end of the stick.
YES it does matter...Yea KNOW change can be a good thing..NO the company did not fund the DVD.