shiner

First, you'll have to explain to me how working more hours at the request of management is actually breaching your contract. Does your contract spell out a maximum number of hours after which you can be reprimanded? That sounds odd to me - but I am not privy to the details of the contract.

I don't expect any specific number of hours from my employees and they are free to take any breaks they need to eat, go to the doctor, take a nap, surf the web, whatever - as long as they are getting the job done. They are professionals and I trust them to make good decisions. They are not unionized and as far as I know, haven't considered it.

Now, what I am talking about is doing the bare minimum vs. going above and beyond what is specifically asked. It has nothing to do with hours. If someone shows initiative, a great attitude, has good ideas, doesn't call in sick when they aren't, or doesn't threaten to screw my customers to 'teach me a lesson', I am much more inclined to pay them higher salary.

sxf24

Legally speaking, requesting more hours (the difference between the contractual requirement and FAA legal limit) is not breaching the contract. However, the pilots are not legally required (nor, in many peoples minds, morally obligated) work more hours than what they have been contractually obligated to.

Vegas Agent

I suppose my biggest gripe of this whole issue, other than it making my job less than enjoyable over the past week, is that NW failed to make any public statement about it until 3-4 days AFTER it all began. We, as agents, were informed of the situation via an internal memo a couple of days prior, and had heard from the pilots, weeks ago, that there would be a serious staffing issue during the summer months.

Had a public statement been made, at least at the time we were informed as agents, it might have saved alot of grief for thousands of travelers...and made our jobs a bit easier.

Jaimito Cartero

Yeah, they're just following the rules. It's too bad that you and the other NW staff that are still trying to help are the ones taking the brunt of it.

And the horror of having to fly on Delta in coach. I think I'll be scarred for life.

MikeMpls

But now he's given us a specific date (7/2/07) for the end of world. Check back on 7/3/07.

RobOnLI

A nice, long article about this situation was put up on the Seattle Times website this morning: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._webnwa27.html

-RM

psychtobe

He he, actually <pilots'> is correct because we are presuming NWAFA was talking about more than one pilot.

troyintn

The thing I do not like about all the statements is simple I do not care, who's fault it is. If NWA cancells to many flights and this becomes common place I will fly another airline. I wish the unions and NWA mngrs would spend more time fixing the problem versus putting blame.

NWAFA

Ok, I'm not a lawyer and apparently using the term "breaching the contract" wasn't correct.

It sounds as if you treat your employees as an asset and not a liability. NW hasn't figured that out.

You've got the last paragraph backwards. We were doing our jobs and then NW reduced pay and benefits by 40%. Now there is no incentive to go above and beyond the call of duty. NW is getting what they're paying for. Our contracts state what is expected of us from NW. If NW wanted more, they would have put it in the contract.

What I post is what I know at the time. I'm not lying. And the very post you quoted me does say gossip, it might be bravado, and I have been trying to talk people out of walking off the job. And the next person who posted after me confirmed that they have been hearing the same thing.

I didn't pull the date 07.02.07 out of thin air. That is the date NW is depositing the stock money in our 401k accounts.

I'm a Flight Attendant. I'm privy to sources that you are not. I know what I hear when I am at work and do have friends that I keep in contact on a regular basis.

I've had to spend more of my free time at home lately due to starting up my business.

NWAFA

LOL! Thanks for the lesson. I knew there was an apostrophe in there somewhere.

SchmutzigMSP

Heh. Leave it to me to simplify it beyond reality. touché.

shiner

Was there an incentive to go above and beyond the call of duty before NW cut pay? After all, you only NEED to do the minimum as stated in the contract.

Listen, I am not saying that NW management has made wise decisions with regard to handling labor. But, this is still a two way street. Why would NW pay MORE for (or even attempt to negotiate with) labor that deliberately inconveniences customers and threatens to time resignations to have the most damaging impact to the company?

I have this conversation with my two young kids frequently... "I don't care who started it, blah, blah, blah". I think they are starting to get it. NW management and the unions pretty much deserve each other.

Vegas Agent

I'll just put my last 2 cents in and be done with this.

The bottom line, I suppose, is that management came into negotiations stating "shared sacrafice" and went on about how everyone was taking pay cuts...employees were very weary, given they were burned by the 1993 concessions...but ultimately voted for the cuts to save the carrier and their jobs...now, as soon as the company is out of BK, it's time to reward management, giving them back every dime they had sacraficed and the raises they were given during the BK process...another slap in the face to the 1000s that are making the carrier run each day. Now, labor is stretched thin, working maximum hours for less pay and benefits, and once again, management wants to blame their greatest asset...when, bottom line, it is their decisions that brought us to this point. Call it finger pointing, or whatever, they chose to stab their labor in the back, what type of reaction did they expect (if, in fact, pilots are calling in sick)? From what I am hearing in the last week, the main issue right now is getting the pilots changing equipment and recalls through training...about a 6 week process, which has backlogged the training department...who do we blame here? Well, I recall the pilots union stating many months ago that there were not going to be enough pilots to fly the planned schedule...and if there actually are, then why didn't the training process start sooner??

Yes, this needs a fix, and quick...if pilots are already flying a 90-hour minimum schedule with 100-hr max, there's little room for delays before they are out of time for the month (with 1000 hr max/yr...I hate to see November and December). As I've stated many times, this company will never reach it's potential or be the great carrier than it can be without a happy labor force, and NW management doesn't realize that or doesn't care...they're all here for the short-term I suppose, to raid the coffers and move on. Precisely why we need a different management team and a different management approach...this one has already lost the faith and trust of the employees and there's really no way that's going to change now (Doug had a chance to help things but he chose otherwise).

Jalinth

The simple fact that you are dealing with humans who've just endured a large pay-cut means that you need to deal with your labour situation gingerly. My own view is that once NW thought they were going to win the bankruptcy fight, they needed to deal with the unions immediately. You had a bunch of people remarkably p***** at the company due to large paycuts, so the company needed to at least passify them ASAP. If all of this activity took place during "routine" negotiations, then I'd agree with you - why negotiate. But you are dealing with a situation where the vast majority of people wouldn't give an inch over the contract terms, strictly construed. NW needed to plan for it.

I know of companies who've been required to continue with a customer contract during a bankruptcy case (losing money), and trust me, they give exactly what the contract said they must. Not an iota more. No latitude on anything. Similar situation here.

roger/wilco

How did it work out for Lorenzo ant the shareholders?