username

Looks like with the new snags hit when they tried to hammer out the agreement, there is no end in-sight for the strike.

username

https://udn.com/news/story/13013/3900347 has some details.

Basically, they could not agree on the "no retribution" details. The 2 main disagreements were:

- Union wanted BR to retract the 8 May announcement which could mean no bonus or raises and no nonrev benefits on BR or other carriers if a strike happens. BR would not retract that

- The 18 FAs who reported before 4 PM for 2 flights after 4 PM on 6/20 but decided to strike. The Union does not want BR to penalize them but BR is investigating

The bright side is they have agreed to schedule another session on 2 July. The saga continues. Maybe we need to bring in Hello Kitty and the harmony that comes with it to help move this along

gilboman

Based on conditions that have not been fulfilled to end the strike

You've never signed an agreement before? that's sort of the whole point of them. In exchange for certain consideration (end of strike), the other party will provide another consideration in exchange (terms agreeable to Union) who has not been fulfilled

gilboman

If this is the case, pretty petty and zero regard for their customers for Eva to prolong the strike on this

But their management has been incompetent from beginning

tris06

Ahh crap, just let those strikers off the hook and settle it for goodness sake. I think having the airline fully operational is more important and profitable than pursuing these 18 employees.

They did do the naughty by not following the rules strictly to the letter. Maybe the airline can punish them in more reasonable ways like deny promotions or etc.

Busy summer period is coming up within the next 1 week in Asia they need this done now.

BlackHappy

yjc281

I guess we can agree to diagree but I applaud the management for enforcing law and order. Only if the union is busted or weakened would I dare to buy Eva tickets again.

krispykrme

tris06

And your comment does equally display one sided opinion. The whole point of having a union is the ability for members to take strike action if the majority agree. I can't comment on if the 18 want to keep their jobs or not. One of the main things being in the union is to be protected from employer retribution if they started striking when they announced it offically. So the 18 have an issue there. But the rest of the members who followed the rules should have a far stronger case.

We don't want overly powerful organisations with zero union power for the workers and we don't want overly powerful unions and companies at complete mercy of every demand a union makes.

Considering the FAs already dropped their some of their biggest demands and compromised I think that management should do the same.

username

It is so hard to say what is "fair" and the scary thing public opinion, Internet justice, politics will end up influencing the outcome.

There is no doubt that Evergreen/EVA is a very disciplined and top-down company. That is really the key to their success. So, they cannot allow unruly FAs to dictate things. On the other hand, time is changing and they need to adapt their management style. On the other hand, they can't adapt away the company culture, control and profitability.

It is kind of sad that the late founder first had the family feud after he passed and now this. I really fear that given how angry some of these FAs are, service will suffer. Also, some seem really emotional. How would that work in an emergency?

bearchemist

Actually I think the 18 FAs are not the sticking point. What the union really wanted, but did not say explicitly, is the immunity to ALL the potential lawsuits. There is already doubts regarding the legality of the initial strike vote (whether the KHH-based FAs can participate), refused to return passports and other work documents which is against FAs' will, and other defamation lawsuits based on union reps' appearance in various talk shows last week. The union does have right to strike if required steps were made, however it does not get to hide under the strike umbrella and make legally dubious moves without expecting any repercussion. Just last night Ms. Liao was caught lying about a phantom phone call with the Labor minister during a media interview.

sfo3388

I would avoid EVA for at least six months once the strike is over. I give most of my business to United anyway.

Every time when airlines is hiring FAs in Taiwan, you will see hundreds of young ladies waiting in line. Unless I see the news such as "EVA and China Airlines have serious FA shortage", I don't think FA strike will get much support from the company or general public. Agree or not, many people think that FAs are easily replaceable. Years ago when UA FAs had strikes, I saw the similar view from American public. FAs are not pilots.

Can't wait to see Starlux Airlines enter the market in January 2020!

unleashed

If the young ladies are forming a long line trying to get hired then any argument against easiness of replacement is null.
In today's democratic economies there should be no place for unions. They should be rendered illegal, as any other extortion racket.

I'm really curious about Starlux. Their business model seems to be about going after the high-end customer.
Remains to be seen how it will turn out for them. (I'm not optimistic).

username

When EVA started, their goal was to go after high-end customers. The first 2 747-400s had 2/3 of the lower deck as Evergreen Economy. Very soon they realized that did not work and shrank the cabin to only 1/3 of the lower deck.

It is interesting K Chang, knowing the numbers, is going this way again. I think his style is totally different from traditional Evergreen (and that is probably one of the many things that rub the old guards the wrong way). He has also come out and said he won't be as accommodating to unions either but his style is different and he can hear what front line employees say. He does appear very arrogant and raw in his media interviews and I am not sure if that helps honest interactions with employees. He did marry an EVA FA, right?

A lot of this kind of reflects the "democracy" in Taiwan. It will be interesting to see where things lead on both fronts.

coolfish1103

I don't think K Chang's ideas will work in Taiwan, cause the market itself is not high end. His strategy of buying lots of planes didn't work either and is now haunting down EVA's operation (though he is gone thanks to his half brothers). That's another topic though.

The real reason behind all these that caused the break down was because the union added many clauses to protect itself from EVA. There were too many dubious things done throughout the entire operation of the strike that leaves many things for EVA to take legal actions. The 18 FAs are just an excuse, plus EVA never said they were going to sue the FAs. Also, in no ways EVA will agree to return the benefits to pre-5/8. All the ground staff and in house worked so hard thanks to the FA striking (plus those FAs that did not strike), why would these FAs receive the same benefits as if they did not strike?

It's likely EVA may not sue the FAs, but they will definitely destroy this union however way they can, not to say this union is doing everything so wrong that most public opinions don't support them at all (whether moral or legality issues). There are so many lies given out...