Originally Posted by
Gators300
I'm fully aware, and just because it's hard for the airline to deal with doesn't change anything about how consumers will react. In fact, it's worse for a national airline like AA, compared to say Alaska, where it was pioneered, as they were regional. Again, I ask how FAs come out ahead if an already failing airline is having mass cancellations over the course of weeks or months due to a CHAOS strike. There's too many other options available to consumers. Who is going to risk flying AA if their flight has a good chance of being cancelled?
That is exactly what CHAOS creates, and it is a far bigger burden on the airline than it is to the flight attendant union. The airline literally cannot afford for CHAOS to happen.
Originally Posted by
Gators300
Ultimately, there will be downsizing regardless of how they decide who gets let go. A CHAOS strike makes it harder to determine who to fire, but in your own words, all FAs are basically the same, right?
An airline cannot simply "downsize." AA has ~1,000 aircraft that it has to pay for. It can't just park them.
Are you aware of the applicable federal labor laws? AA can't fire a flight attendant for engaging in CHAOS, i.e., a federally protected job action once an impasse is called and the 30-day cooling off period has run.
When did I in any way say that all flight attendants are the same?