How might CHAOS effect travel after August 25 at 9:01 pm CDT

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Aug 21, 2006, 12:52 pm

#1081

rwill11

Suspended

Join Date: Jan 2005

Location: seattle

Programs: UNITED 2K HILTON DIAMOND

Posts: 2,774

Quote:

Originally Posted by BearX220

Calm down. You're the one spritzing accusatory terms like "chauvinist," "condescending," and "garbage" at me into what is meant to be a rational if spirited discussion. You're also attacking me for a term rwill11 used, but this is a all a poor use of server space.
There is no security. It's a mirage. It's gone. I am not defending NW management, but it is inescapable that in the new economy you do not get to do something forever at a livable wage just because you have been doing it for awhile and you do not want to do anything else. Business models change and die and the legacy airline business model is dying. To believe otherwise -- to claim that a dark and shadowy "management" is trying to "destroy my security" -- is a worldview everyone has to abandon.
I don't believe "the FAs" as a bloc are anything. A goodly minority of them are pragmatists; look how close the last labor deal came to passing. I do believe a fair number of FAs believe, or have been led to believe, that CHAOS will somehow conjure up more job security. That, I believe, is not a totally mature view of the world, no. I remember a lot of unionized workers at Eastern Airlines, with their "Full Pay to The Last Day" bumper stickers, were completely poleaxed when the brinksmanship they endorsed actually killed the airline. Until they actually turned out the lights at EA, a lot of those folks inhabited an alternate universe where nothing really bad would actually ever happen.

I don't like CHAOS; I would prefer a traditional strike. I don't like transportation unions much because they have had a consistently destructive effect on transportation companies -- as another poster has noted, most such companies in the US, from railroads to bus lines, have been wiped out.

Is this "emotional garbage"? No. It's economics.

I was taken out of context. I clarified my statement in post 1071. Leave me out of the arguement please.

Aug 21, 2006, 2:21 pm

#1082

cmdinnyc

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: Philadelphia, PA USA

Programs: CO Silver, HHonors Gold, Marriott Silver

Posts: 982

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lehava

I have had the best customer service from people who make very little money, think of the woman pouring your coffee in a diner who is working for tips yet is friendly, welcoming and so on.

Clearly you've never been to a diner in Jersey...

Aug 21, 2006, 2:42 pm

#1083

cmdinnyc

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: Philadelphia, PA USA

Programs: CO Silver, HHonors Gold, Marriott Silver

Posts: 982

Quote:

Originally Posted by fromYXU

Creditors make that call and that is not likely. It would reset the clock back a year. Not viable right now.

I really think that NW needs to renegotiate TA2 into something more pacceptable to a small number of FA (to switch the vote): decrease duration on contract, profit sharing... Likely that the longer they wait more FAs will have a negative attitude towards TA2 and TA2.1.

I doubt profit sharing will fly, as I heard that the last time NW FAs took concessions several years ago the company backed out of the profit sharing agreement several years later.

From reading the FA posters on the board, the single biggest issue with the contract was the duration. TA1/TA2 were expected to be in effect for 5 years, but once it expired, the FAs would continue to work under its terms. Given the generous terms to NW, the company would have no incentive to quickly negotiate a new contract. Combined with previous history where management dragged on the negotiations over a new contract, the terms of TA1/TA2 would likely be in place for almost 10 years before a new contract was put in place.

Hence, the FAs balked at the deal.

Aug 21, 2006, 2:46 pm

#1084

cmdinnyc

Join Date: Jun 2003

Location: Philadelphia, PA USA

Programs: CO Silver, HHonors Gold, Marriott Silver

Posts: 982

Quote:

Originally Posted by USA_flyer

Personally, I can't wait to hear about the flights where the FA's just leave the plane with all the bags and passengers sat there. I can see any sympathy disappearing faster than a fart in a hurricane.

FAA rules states that all flights must have minimum staffing on board when there are ANY pax on board. I imagine any FAs who walk off a flight, causing the number of FAs to fall below minimum staffing, would be subject to some pretty hefty discipline w/o union support. Once the flight has minimum staffing, it can leave at any time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nwaafa.org

You are never to walk off an aircraft if there are passengers onboard unless a minimum crew remains with the passengers per the F.A.R.s. The remainder of the crew may leave the aircraft only when all passengers have deplaned.

Most likely is that one or more FAs would refuse to board a flight, thus preventing it from reaching minimum staffing, and preventing pax boarding to commence. End result - you're stuck in the airport waiting until the FA(s) board.