Travel Privileges for East and West VF Program

[PITbull]

Had a f/a call me today asking me why West gets to keep their ID while on VF and East does not...

The information below regarding the TSA involvment in whether a flight crew member keeps their ID on Furlough is a down right LIE!!!

Where in the hell does Mike get his information???? Comic books???

The PHL f/a who called me said that John McCorky has an excuse for his LACK of involvment on this issue...saying that the EAST and WEST get pay difference too, according to their contract.. so,.... so what about the ID.... is his argument doesn't matter.

Well folks the EAST f/as go on leave for 3 months vS the WEST Furlough that is 6 months or longer...it has NOTHING TO DO WITH TSA OR FAA, BUT RATHER A LAZY MECP THAT JUST DOESN'T WANT TO BOTHER AND WOULD RATHER POST A LIE TO THE F/AS. USAirways is one company with one company policy and has decided to pull the IDs of the EAST...why? Because the MECP has not challenged it; nor has the idiot in PHL.

Why in the hell do you guys still hold on to these worthless union reps???????

The info below is Bull ####, and the ID retainment or return has nothing to do with TSA security. That's a fact!!!

The return of the IDs is just company policy, and the company decided to treat the two groups differently. And you have an MECP that just doesn't give a crap about it. There is NO CONTRACT LANGUAGE THAT STATES THAT THE ID OF THE F/A BE RETURNED TO THE COMPANY WHILE ON FURLOUGH. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FLYING STATUS WHEN NONREVING...ITS JUST THAT THE ID IS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE FOR THE F/AS. And if the East f/as want to retain their IDs than the company should allow the EAST to do so; just as they allow the WEST. But, you have a lousy MECP that just posts BS below so he doesn't have to bother with the disucssiion.

GET HIM OUT OF OFFICE; FOR YOUR SAKES. He has no intentions of securing a joint contract because he's more interested in securing his seat as MECP for as long as he can. He knows he can't get the vote in PHX, therefore his days would be numbered.

GET HIM OUT. PHL and MIKE are in cohoots to control the variables to keep them both in office and control what happens as long as the political environment keeps them in their seats. They surround themselves with those reps that do whateve they want, take your dues $$$ and squander it with self intest to promote personal agendas that keep them in office for life, They are spin-mongers who know how to fabricate and spin the story to confuse the issues. Mike needs to make a CALL to Cindy Simone to correct this ASAP.

The BELOW is posted on the AFA website. JUST spinned a lie as usual.



Dear Members,

DIFFERENCES IN TRAVEL PRIVILEGES FOR EAST AND WEST VOLUNTARY FURLOUGH PROGRAMS

Last week the Company announced Voluntary Furlough Programs for both East and West Flight Attendants. The East Voluntary Furlough (VF) is for 100 Flight Attendants for a period of approximately three (3) months. The West Voluntary Leave of Absence (VLOA) is for 300 Flight Attendants - 150 for a six (6) month period and 150 for a sixteen (16) month period.

Although the Q and A documents for both East and West refer to "Company Policy" with regard to travel benefits, there are distinct contractual differences and TSA requirements for East and West Flight Attendants. The two Q and A documents are being rewritten to reflect those differences.

The East Contract states travel under a VF is in accordance with "Company Policy". The current Company policy is those on a leave in lieu of furlough travel at an S4 boarding priority. In addition, the TSA requires that an East Flight Attendant awarded a VF must surrender his/her ID- thus making jumpseat travel unavailable.

The West contract contains language stating the Company's travel policy will not be "reduced or diminished during the life of the Agreement". The West successfully won an arbitration that upheld that language and one of the requirements of the award was the previous Company policy with respect to travel was that boarding priority could not be reduced for a Flight Attendant on a VLOA. The TSA requirements for West Flight Attendants are also different. A West Flight Attendant does not have to surrender his/her ID while on a VLOA- thus making jumpseat travel available.

Please understand that although in some aspects we appear to be one Company we are not. We still work under two different Collective Bargaining Agreements that contain many differences.

Thank you,

Mike Flores, President
The US Airways Master Executive Council
AFA-CWA

 

[Itestwell]

Why in the hell do you guys still hold on to these worthless union reps???????

Why? Because the senior girls have JM in their pocket. Rather than carry their contract in their 4 bags, they wait for the LECP to print what "time" they will become illegal. It's easier. (There is a reason he prints that out: votes, although he sent out a "carry your contract, I'm tired!" to the ATH girls today....)

Wait till 87-88 is on straight reserve this winter in PHL. Maybe we will hear some battle cries. h34r:

 

[Onestep2flt]

Let me add something to this debate. I am only on the outside looking in so I could be way off. I can only go on what friends have told me that I have made over the years.

As far as The MEC president goes I do not believe he has the best interests of ALL flight attendants in mind. I have had several different people tell me he said right to their face that majority rules. Ideas shared with him are either completely dismissed or he states that the senior flight attendants would never vote yes for something like that. My problem with that is that you must explain to ALL flight attendants why a particular thing would benefit the group as a whole then let them decide for themselves with their vote. It is not up to him to pick and choose what he will present to the company based on what his senior pals say. As the president you must listen to ALL of the group you represent. While it is true that majority rules in the vote itself but it has to make to the vote for there to be any equal representation.

Speaking about the ID thing. I would agree that your MEC president has a responsibility to again fight for equality for ALL. I do not believe the reasons given either. However, I think it is a matter of semantics. If my info is correct your company is calling east and west leaves something different. The East being a voluntary furlough and the west is being called a leave of absence. Of course I would need to see what your company wrote for myself to know for sure so I could be off on that. Someone please check this out and report back. If this is the case that is where your TSA difference could be. I agree that in the eyes of the FAA you are one with the same company policy involving any ID badges but if one person is FURLOUGHED and the other is on VOLUNTARY LEAVE that makes a huge difference. Again your president should be fighting for at least the company to explain the difference and reference any TSA requirement for all to see.

 

[HP2USFA]

There is a difference here. We on the west were offered a Voluntary Leave of Absence in lieu of furlough. Those weren't filled however and now we're furloughing 186. The company is also offering the West a Voluntary Furlough before Involuntary and we don't keep our badge on that.

So, those on a LOA keep badges and j/s rights. Those on furlough do not. Nor do we get any parting gifts either.

Not that I'm defending Mike by any means. Quite the contrary. But I did want to offer a bit of clarification.

 

[Furloughd4now]

Well (correct me if I'm wrong) In order to JS doesn't one have to be an "active" FA?

Are you going to tell me that I, as an ACTIVE employee, can be bumped out of the JS by a more senior INACTIVE FA on "LOA"?

Reciprocal JS ... Don't you have to be active? How would OA's know the difference?

 

[HP2USFA]

On West metal it's still first come first serve so seniority matters not in that instance. On east metal I doubt a West Inactive could bump anyone.

 

[Furloughd4now]

I just happened to find this at AFA66 dated 12/08

Greetings,

VLOAs Cleared to ride Jumpseat

At the November Crew News Town Hall with Doug Parker, the question of why flight attendants on Voluntary Leave Of Absence could not ride the cabin jumpseat was asked. Parker deferred the question to other US Airways department heads,none of which could ascertain the reasons behind the policy that until this year was never a part of the VLOA policy for our flight attendants.

Without any FAA regulations that restrict the policy and without any reason to prohibit it, Parker and US Airways management reversed their decision and have agreed to allow flight attendants on VLOAs to ride the cabin jumpseat.

Now Crew News Town Hall meetings are not "segregated". Therefore, why is the policy "segregated"?????? There are East FAs on VLOA who cannot JS.... this needs to be addressed immediately.

Also this should be incorporated with the upcoming "furloughs" on the East. Its the essentially the same program, just named differently.

When did the west policy change back to FCFS? Just curious

 

[Onestep2flt]

Seems my info was correct then. The east being a VOLUNTARY FURLOUGH thus must surrender ID. The west is a VOLUNTARY LEAVE thus they may keep their ID. Now the question remains as to why the difference in policy. As pointed out there will now be VOLUNTARY FURLOUGHS offered to the west in lieu of involuntary furlough. Is there a contractual reason that both parties were offered very different things. This is what we must now find out. We need the contract language for both east and west to determine why this particular path was followed.

As I have pointed out before from a friend knowledgeable about contract language pointed out, the east contract has enough holes to fly your entire fleet of A330's through it. So it is possible that the west has some kind of language to allow a voluntary leave before a voluntary furlough. Seems strange language but quite outside the box as far as how it would determine their privileges such as your pass travel and such.

I am not sure about how your jump seat thing works but I do not see a problem as long as it would put you below people that are actively working. However, that may also be a contractual right that was voted on by the members so nobody should complain about that. If it is in fact just something Parker crafted in a town hall meeting then that needs to be stopped. This would be called negotiations and that belongs in contract talks with your union. I do agree with another poster that you are not an active employee when on leave of absence, especially for 16 or 18 months. You guys really need to be lighting a fire underneath your MEC president on these issues!

 

[USstew23]

Well (correct me if I'm wrong) In order to JS doesn't one have to be an "active" FA?

Are you going to tell me that I, as an ACTIVE employee, can be bumped out of the JS by a more senior INACTIVE FA on "LOA"?

Reciprocal JS ... Don't you have to be active? How would OA's know the difference?

Exactly!! And this burns me right up because they (the other airlines) have no idea if your active or not, as long as you have your ID and there is a seat you're on!

and PITBull is right, what a crock!!! When I read that E-Line about the TSA and FAA, I thought, uh, something is rotten in the state of Denmark (besides their cheese!!) I completely give up, between this company who lies to anyone and everyone and this union who seems to be doing the same just to pad their own interests, I just don't think it's worth the energy anymore. No wonder US has become such a cancer (from the inside out!!) to the industry... we're the laughing stock, no other airline or their employees want anything to do with us, and to top it off, we can't even get a good, non-warped beverage cart in the FWD galley of the 190!!

 

[PITbull]

There is a difference here. We on the west were offered a Voluntary Leave of Absence in lieu of furlough. Those weren't filled however and now we're furloughing 186. The company is also offering the West a Voluntary Furlough before Involuntary and we don't keep our badge on that.

So, those on a LOA keep badges and j/s rights. Those on furlough do not. Nor do we get any parting gifts either.

Not that I'm defending Mike by any means. Quite the contrary. But I did want to offer a bit of clarification.

This issue is NOT about the type of "Leave"; but rather the inconveninece of giving up the ID. The ID return is NOT, and I REPEAT, NOT an FAA or TSA security issue. Its a company policy. In the East the company would require that badges be returned for any leave.... But the WEST have a "leave" and I mean extended Leave and get to keep theirs. Makes NO SENSE to take badges from 100 f/as on the East for a 3 month leave now does it; and yet the WEST who are out longer get to keep theirs. Its actually an administrative headache for the company to collect the badges.

THE POINT IS THE EAST MECP WILL NOT ASK THE COMPANY TO ALLOW THOSE 100 ON THE EAST TO KEEP THEIRS. why???? bECAUSE SOME MEMBERS OF THE MEC asked him to. And because PHL doesn't give a shittt unless its an INTERNATIONAL issue, doesn't want to bother...when the majority of the leaves are coming from his damn base.

Something a simple as this just can't be handled. Why do you think there is no merged agreement????

Your answer, its all politics for AFA at USAirways. Mike just wants to hold on to his MECP seat until he goes out on retirment. As long as their is the current MECP at PHX, he will lose his seat on the vote.

So, Mike could careless about IDs, and Cindy won't budge unless Mike asks her for it. Mike loves the control and he literally thumbs his know to the members of the MEC.

Mike and John are all about holding their seats. They do as little work as possible specifically John, and collects your dues $$.

I am all about collective bargaining and have good representation; but I'm am not about supporting lazy reps who have gotten way to comfortable, and know that they can hold their seat. Mike holds his because of your two idiot reps DCA and PHL, and John holds his because he is a "kiss up" to international f/as. ...they keep him in office.

So those two yoyo reps rub each other's backs to stay in office for life because they they that the f/as are not unified enough to demand change from them.

Unbelievable. If I were still the PIT rep and behaved like those two knuckleheads, PIT f/as would have thrown me out of office in jack-flash time.

You guys should be calling Mike and demanding that East furloughees get the same treatement with regard to the ID as West. its a simple matter of a phone call to the company.

This maybe a simple issue, but the guy just can't handle it. And don't let him spin it to you. Both he and John will spin the truth so they don't look like they sat on something that could have been handled.

Remember, this is neither a TSA issue or FAA.

Call either of these gov. agencies up on the phone, they will tell you its your company's policy not government. I know this from when I was in office.

 

[Furloughd4now]

Seems my info was correct then. The east being a VOLUNTARY FURLOUGH thus must surrender ID. The west is a VOLUNTARY LEAVE thus they may keep their ID. Now the question remains as to why the difference in policy. As pointed out there will now be VOLUNTARY FURLOUGHS offered to the west in lieu of involuntary furlough. Is there a contractual reason that both parties were offered very different things. This is what we must now find out. We need the contract language for both east and west to determine why this particular path was followed.

As I have pointed out before from a friend knowledgeable about contract language pointed out, the east contract has enough holes to fly your entire fleet of A330's through it. So it is possible that the west has some kind of language to allow a voluntary leave before a voluntary furlough. Seems strange language but quite outside the box as far as how it would determine their privileges such as your pass travel and such.

Irrespective of leave East MUST give up IDs, because we are considered "inactive", which means you cannot JS. Why doesn't this hold true on the west???

West side VLOAs and VF are 2 completely different sections in their contract. You can access it by going to AFA66 web. West side contract does not specifically state you can keep IDs. That comes up in Q&As. (also refer to what I posted earlier from an eline of theirs)

East side is all one section and goes in order. VLOA, then VF, UVF. This time around in the east they went straight to VF. Perhaps because the last leave was VLOA?? But wouldn't this new leave qualify as "new" in which VLOAs were NOT offered first and then VF???

Somethin Stinks is agreed :down: :down:

 

[PITbull]

I just happened to find this at AFA66 dated 12/08




Now Crew News Town Hall meetings are not "segregated". Therefore, why is the policy "segregated"?????? There are East FAs on VLOA who cannot JS.... this needs to be addressed immediately.

Also this should be incorporated with the upcoming "furloughs" on the East. Its the essentially the same program, just named differently.

When did the west policy change back to FCFS? Just curious

You hit the nail on the head. I think you are the only one that gets it. These are leaves...period. The matter of the ID has nothing to do with TSA or FAA, it has to do with company policy. Again, WEST and EAST being treated differently.

I'm not saying the WEST should turn their IDs in; but rather the East should NOT turn theirs in.

The point here is the YOUR AFA MECP will not act on it...because he just doesn't want to.

I called a few members of the MEC and asked this why are the f/as complaining, even to me in an e-mail about this ID issue...and they said they can't get the President to act.
I think its just stubborness on Mike's part. He doesn't like being told to work; specifically if the orders are coming from another base...other than PHL, where he needs PHL to keep his seat. And PHL doesn't give a crap.

 

[PITbull]

Seems my info was correct then. The east being a VOLUNTARY FURLOUGH thus must surrender ID. The west is a VOLUNTARY LEAVE thus they may keep their ID. Now the question remains as to why the difference in policy. As pointed out there will now be VOLUNTARY FURLOUGHS offered to the west in lieu of involuntary furlough. Is there a contractual reason that both parties were offered very different things. This is what we must now find out. We need the contract language for both east and west to determine why this particular path was followed.

As I have pointed out before from a friend knowledgeable about contract language pointed out, the east contract has enough holes to fly your entire fleet of A330's through it. So it is possible that the west has some kind of language to allow a voluntary leave before a voluntary furlough. Seems strange language but quite outside the box as far as how it would determine their privileges such as your pass travel and such.

I am not sure about how your jump seat thing works but I do not see a problem as long as it would put you below people that are actively working. However, that may also be a contractual right that was voted on by the members so nobody should complain about that. If it is in fact just something Parker crafted in a town hall meeting then that needs to be stopped. This would be called negotiations and that belongs in contract talks with your union. I do agree with another poster that you are not an active employee when on leave of absence, especially for 16 or 18 months. You guys really need to be lighting a fire underneath your MEC president on these issues!

I know that answer intimately well. There is NOTHING contractual about holding and ID on any leave, or returning the ID for either airline. Just a matter of company policy.

And that's a fact.

 

[Onestep2flt]

I was very curious about this situation and just placed a call to someone that works for the east as a flight attendant. Again, going based on their interpretation of your contract language as I don't have a copy for myself. Section 19 of the east agreement has several steps in reduction of personnel. The way that it was read to me there are three steps but it does not say that any one step is above the rest although they are numbered as follows. 1. A voluntary furlough based on seniority. 2. A voluntary separation program based on seniority. 3. A leave in lieu of furlough offered in seniority order at a particular domicile. The specific language is longer and I did not write it all down so please read for yourself if you have access. I find number 3 to be significant. It would seem that perhaps your MEC is only picking parts of the contract to defend. Remember, nowhere does it state that these three particular items need to be followed in any certain order. It just says they will offer the following 1,2,3 before any involuntary furlough. Number three would be similar to what the west is doing based on the fact that travel privileges remain. Although it says nothing toward your jump seat status. I believe it says in line with corporate policy which is open to interpretation.

My personal thought is your MEC did not want number three to be utilized as it may stir up too much trouble with the soldiers that follow him. Number three is based on a particular domicile. My read would be that the company can say we need 20 people at one place and 100 in another. I think for him it may be all or nothing because his pal Sue is in a base that only needs three people and Joe is in a base that needed 100. Joe got it and Sue did not. Sue is senior to Joe so now Sue will remember this forever. There could be political consequences for actually following the contract in this case.

This might just be the difference between what the company is offering east and west. Since I mostly travel on the east coast I have not made too many friends on the west yet. I know a couple of agents but no flight attendants yet. I hope someone on the west can bring light to their contract language. This is very interesting to me how all this falls into place.

Hey, I hope I am wrong but there sure is a theme going on with you MEC.

 

[PITbull]

My expereince when I was in office, is this...my absolutely hardest part of the job was dealing with my own collegues in the union. The company mangement was the easiest part of my job to deal with...the difficult absolutely painstaking work was getting consensus from the members of the MEC to align together to act. Somehow, if you won something from the company and they weren't involved, they would focus on how they could ruin your credibility and influence with both the company and the f/as. It was simply exhausting.

There was such jealously among the group. If some LECP thought you were getting to much influence and attention or even power from the company or f/as... they would try their best to take you out. Same all the way up to the International level. There was always some conspiracy going on. When I was the LECP, I circumvented the MECP many times because he would just "muddy the waters" on matters that he could not influence on the company level. If an LECP had more influence, than the MECP would start a conspiracy to get that LECP out. That was my experience. And when I became the MECP, base that were jealous would align to get me out.... specifically CLT and DCA at that time. The more you got for the f/as, the madder that made them.


It seems to me, the worst reps are so crafty, they are able to spin anything to hold their seats. And their greatest lie -machine retorhic is conveying to the f/as with the issue, that it was somehow THIER own problem and get over it.