Flight attendants union file a grievance over AA's F turndown service
Sep 3, 2011, 7:42 am
#46
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 12,097
When briefed by the company APFA cautioned them that more research needed to be done to ensure this was not going to cause an unreasonable workload for the Flight Attendants, and not in violation of the 777 agreement. The company has chosen to move forward.
Sep 3, 2011, 7:56 am
#47
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: LI, NY
Programs: AA PLT, AAdv since Day One
Posts: 2,682
Contract issues notwithstanding, what bothers me about this is the attitude implied by the union's survey. The wording looks for excuses to complain to management (or future arbiter) and misses and opportunity to elicit first-hand feedback from the pax about a newly introduced service for their best customers. How about adding some questions like:
* Did any passengers comment on the turn-down service?
* Were these comments generally positive, negative or neutral?
* Do you feel passengers think the turn-down service added value to the FC product.
etc....
Let's assume for the moment that the feedback, as documented in my revised AFPA survey, yielded a positive pax reaction to the service. AFPA could then use that as leverage in their negotiations with management (You want us to do this? Something the pax likes? Ok, then we want ......)
If on the other hand, the survey yields negative or indifferent results, they can use that to encourage management to drop the service and stop burdening the FAs with a task that isn't valued and it seems the AFPA would rather not have their members perform.
But, no, the survey (and by extension, the AFPA) isn't about what is in the best interest of the pax (and by extension, the health of the airline) it's about what can we document to get out of doing this task.
Sad. Very sad.
* Did any passengers comment on the turn-down service?
* Were these comments generally positive, negative or neutral?
* Do you feel passengers think the turn-down service added value to the FC product.
etc....
Let's assume for the moment that the feedback, as documented in my revised AFPA survey, yielded a positive pax reaction to the service. AFPA could then use that as leverage in their negotiations with management (You want us to do this? Something the pax likes? Ok, then we want ......)
If on the other hand, the survey yields negative or indifferent results, they can use that to encourage management to drop the service and stop burdening the FAs with a task that isn't valued and it seems the AFPA would rather not have their members perform.
But, no, the survey (and by extension, the AFPA) isn't about what is in the best interest of the pax (and by extension, the health of the airline) it's about what can we document to get out of doing this task.
Sad. Very sad.
Sep 3, 2011, 8:29 am
#48
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LAX
Posts: 3,267
Businesses aren't charities, workers aren't volunteers, and passengers don't buy products as an act of kindness. Everyone is in it for themselves...that's the essence of capitalism...and it seems to work quite well to me!
Sep 3, 2011, 8:33 am
#49
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
> 9% Unemployment, no job growth, rumors of a double dip recession and they're worried about an "unreasonable workload"? Wish I was a member of a powerful union so I could claim that when it suited me 
Sep 3, 2011, 9:06 am
#51
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,647
Saw this posted on Airline Forums by a Chicago based flight attendant:
Originally Posted by IORFA
The biggest resource AA doesn't want to provide is man power. AA lost a grievance after they removed a F/A from the 777 around 2000. Now they think they can slide this by with no increase in man power? HAHAHA. They were forced to either add the F/A back or reduce the service. I'll let you guess what AA decided to do. I guess they forgot about that little bit of recent history. ALL they need to do is negotiate a new contract with the APFA and I'm sure all will be fine. In the end, AA will either remove the service or pay for it to be done. It will take an arbitration proceeding to get to that point, so it will be awhile. In the mean time the service will be provided, don't worry nyc6035.
Sep 3, 2011, 9:13 am
#52
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 3,049
In the end, AA will either remove the service or pay for it to be done.
Just how many times would the FA like to be paid for the time this work takes?
As long as the agreed rest breaks are being given there should be no objection to actually working during the rest of the time instead of sitting around chatting.
While the rest of the world is dealing with the effects of the recession and doing what they have to do each day to keep their jobs and help keep their employers in business there seems to be a strange disconnect with reality going on here ...
Sep 3, 2011, 9:15 am
#53
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: AAdvantage PP
Posts: 13,913
I don't want to be another FA basher but come on. Most people are now doing more with less. Moreover, F International paxs are AA's real bread and butter.
Sep 3, 2011, 9:41 am
#54
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SFO/OAK/SJC
Programs: AA LT PLT, 2.15 million miles; Priority Club PLT
Posts: 987
Sep 3, 2011, 9:58 am
#55
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: AA LT PLT; HH Diamond; AS 75K
Posts: 2,879
Geez, I now know where all the wannabe airline CEOs go to express their opinions.
I'm glad the FAs are wanting to know how much of a change this will be and how it will impact other current services. I think it is a very reasonable approach and the process that labor/management agreed to use in differing thoughts. I'm just glad neither AA nor the employees carry the same sense of entitlement that many flyers have.
I'm glad the FAs are wanting to know how much of a change this will be and how it will impact other current services. I think it is a very reasonable approach and the process that labor/management agreed to use in differing thoughts. I'm just glad neither AA nor the employees carry the same sense of entitlement that many flyers have.
Sep 3, 2011, 10:04 am
#56
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LAX
Posts: 3,267
But IIRC, that was also the product of all sides playing the hands they were dealt. A majority of the bondholders decided it was in their best interest to accept the settlement they were offered. 30% of something is better than 100% of nothing. @:-)
Sep 3, 2011, 10:05 am
#57
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LAX
Posts: 3,267
Geez, I now know where all the wannabe airline CEOs go to express their opinions.
I'm glad the FAs are wanting to know how much of a change this will be and how it will impact other current services. I think it is a very reasonable approach and the process that labor/management agreed to use in differing thoughts. I'm just glad neither AA nor the employees carry the same sense of entitlement that many flyers have.
I'm glad the FAs are wanting to know how much of a change this will be and how it will impact other current services. I think it is a very reasonable approach and the process that labor/management agreed to use in differing thoughts. I'm just glad neither AA nor the employees carry the same sense of entitlement that many flyers have.
Sep 3, 2011, 10:06 am
#58
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,238
No, you don't get it -- they are concerned about the interests of the pax. They specifically asked whether or not the T/D service interrupts the (overall) flow of the first class service. And by first class service, they mean FAs sitting in the galley reading People magazine.
Sep 3, 2011, 10:09 am
#59
Join Date: May 2007
Programs: AAdvantage, Hilton
Posts: 3,191
Geez, I now know where all the wannabe airline CEOs go to express their opinions.
I'm glad the FAs are wanting to know how much of a change this will be and how it will impact other current services. I think it is a very reasonable approach and the process that labor/management agreed to use in differing thoughts. I'm just glad neither AA nor the employees carry the same sense of entitlement that many flyers have.
I'm glad the FAs are wanting to know how much of a change this will be and how it will impact other current services. I think it is a very reasonable approach and the process that labor/management agreed to use in differing thoughts. I'm just glad neither AA nor the employees carry the same sense of entitlement that many flyers have.
Passengers are paying customers, they are allowed to have a sense of "entitlement" just like they are allowed to take their business else where if those "entitlements" are not met.
Sep 3, 2011, 10:09 am
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,238
Well, to be fair, we don't know where exactly this "issue" originated. Obviously the union was made aware of the onerous increase in job responsibilities by at least one Flight Attendant, but perhaps it's really just the suits in union leadership causing the stir as a negotiating tactic. I can't say I blame them, that's what the FAs pay them to do. But it certainly seems like an inefficient use of capital for people who make so little money in the first place.