Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

United & AFA Reach TA For Flight Attendants-24 June 2016 - ratified 12 Aug 2016

Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Old Jun 24, 2016, 9:03 am
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
http://unitednegotiations.com/

AFA - United is United
We have a ratified contract. With some of the highest numbers in AFA history, over 90 percent participated in the vote with 53% voting to ratify the agreement. You have participated in a historic vote and there is no doubt that every single one of you is deeply engaged and cares about our future.

United Airlines Flight Attendants Ratify Joint Contract

August 12, 2016

CHICAGO, Aug. 12, 2016 – The flight attendants at United Airlines, represented by the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA), today ratified a contract covering 25,000 flight attendants. Over 90 percent participated in the vote with 53 percent voting to ratify the agreement. This agreement was reached on June 24, 2016, with assistance from the National Mediation Board.

“The high participation in this historic vote demonstrates the deep care Flight Attendants have for their future at the new United Airlines. The contract provides immediate economic gains, sets a new industry standard and ensures Flight Attendants can achieve the benefits of a fully integrated airline," said Sara Nelson, AFA-CWA International President. "This contract would not have been possible without the commitment of Oscar Munoz to unite United Airlines. We appreciate his leadership and the assistance of National Mediation Board Chair Linda Puchala, who was instrumental in helping the parties reach agreement. With the ratification of this contract, we look forward to a great spirit of labor relations at United that fully recognizes the contributions of the people who breathe life into the friendly skies."

Under the new agreement, all United flight attendants will be joined by a single contract, and united by a shared purpose to build the best airline in the world.

“Our flight attendants are the best in the business and deserve this industry-leading contract. I want to recognize the efforts of both negotiating teams, and in particular AFA President, Sara Nelson, for her strong partnership to get the agreement done to move us all forward together in the new spirit of United. When I took this job last year, I promised to turn the page and write a new chapter in our approach to labor and management relations at United. What matters is proof, however, not promises. Thanks to today’s vote, I am proud to say that so far this year we’ve ratified new agreements covering more than 65,000 of our employees,” said Oscar Munoz, United Airlines President and Chief Executive Officer.

The five-year agreement includes double digit pay increases, enhanced job security provisions, maintains and improves healthcare, protects retirement and increases flexibility.
AFA's "Comprehensive Summary of Our Tentative Agreement" - July 2, 2016 (31 pages)

Complete TA - July 11, 2016 (373 pages)

AFA-CWA United Airlines 2016 Tentative Agreement Video


United And AFA Reach Agreement For Flight Attendants

CHICAGO, June 24, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- United and the Association of Flight Attendants announced today that they have reached an agreement on terms of a joint contract that would bring the airline's more than 25,000 flight attendants together into a single work group. The agreement is subject to approval by the Joint Master Executive Council, including all Local Presidents, after which it will become a tentative agreement and will be put out for ratification by flight attendants. The parties will work this weekend to finalize the contract language.
"Today's agreement honors the invaluable role that our flight attendants contribute to United's success and brings us closer than ever to uniting them under a single contract," said United President and Chief Executive Officer Oscar Munoz. "It's been a long journey and I'm grateful to our outstanding flight attendants – the most talented and professional inflight team anywhere in the world – for all they do to keep our customers safe and comfortable."
United thanks both negotiating teams and the National Mediation Board for working to reach this agreement.
United has joint collective bargaining agreements covering the majority of its represented employees and has reached new agreements with three work groups so far this year. Recently, the company's employees who are represented by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers voted to ratify new contracts. Earlier this year, United's pilots voted to ratify a contract extension more than a year ahead of their contract's amendable date, following an expedited negotiations process with the Air Line Pilots Association. The company's dispatchers also voted recently to ratify a contract extension. Additionally, the airline is engaged in mediated negotiations with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
AFA statement - June 24

A few moments ago, our Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) and the company came to an agreement on the terms of a joint collective bargaining agreement. The parties will work to finalize the language this weekend for review by the Joint Master Executive Council (MEC), including all (CAL, CMI, UAL) Local Presidents. These directly elected leaders of all 25,000 Flight Attendants, will meet in Chicago on Monday and Tuesday, June 27 & 28.
AA Joint MEC Unanimously Approves Tentative Agreement - June 28

AFA contract site

Some of these provisions include:
  • Improved single pay scale with base rates topping out in the 13th year at $62.00 and moving to $67.11 throughout the agreement.
  • $2.00 international override per hour and reimbursement for Global Entry.
  • $5.00 incentive rate of pay for all flying between 200 and 330 hours in a quarter.
  • Preserved our Flight Attendant-specific healthcare plan, with additional Medical Plan options.
  • Profit Sharing
  • Protected Scope language that defines Flight Attendant work as belonging to AFA members on the United Airlines System Seniority list – all CAL/UAL/CMI.
  • No Furlough Letter for all Flight Attendants on seniority list at date of ratification.
  • Holiday Pay for 5 holidays each year.
  • Per diem at $2.20 Domestic / $2.70 for International with automatic $0.05 increase every other year
  • Three (3) hours flight time pay and credit for training, plus up to five (5) hours deadhead pay each way to and from training.
  • Industry-leading Reassignment protections and pay.
  • Commuter Program without usage limit and cabin jumpseat qualifies as an available seat for commuting purposes.
  • No weight restrictions for CJA.
  • 12 days off for Reserves and 12 hours free from duty at home between trips.
  • Reserves have ability to trade assigned trips with Lineholders or other Reserves.
  • New ability for Reserves to pick up flying from Lineholders on days off.
  • Domestic 10 hours free from duty on layovers, with at least 8 hours place of lodging at hotel.
  • 12 hours free from duty at home between trips for Domestic Lineholders, but waivable at Flight Attendant option to 10 hours when trading or picking up.
  • Contractual hotel standards with downtown/downtown-like hotels for layovers of 19 hours or more.
  • Hotel Gainsharing, domestic and International
  • Vacation days ranging from 12 days to 40 days, with an additional 7 day Flex Vacation and optional Vacation Fly Through.
  • Maintained and improved Retirement Plans
Print Wikipost

United & AFA Reach TA For Flight Attendants-24 June 2016 - ratified 12 Aug 2016

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 25, 2016, 11:01 am
  #46  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern Calif./Eastern Ida.
Programs: Amethyst Premier Plutonium Medallion
Posts: 20,645
Originally Posted by Productivity
Coexit?
Uaexit?
CO'uta-here
UAdios

PV_Premier is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 11:05 am
  #47  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by EmailKid
UA was MUCH larger airline than CO, flew larger planes so one would think much larger union.
Originally Posted by 2011 10-K
United had approximately 47,000 active employees and Continental had approximately 40,000 active employees
And the share price was 1.05:1 UA:CO at the time of the transaction.

Not so sure that makes it "MUCH" larger as an operator, even with more widebody aircraft pre-merger. Larger, sure, but no so sure it was that superlative.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 11:19 am
  #48  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
Originally Posted by channa
Why? It's been a tad inefficient, but for the most part, it's worked for the past several years. No need to throw the whole thing out if this takes a bit longer to settle.
But how long can it go on for the health of the company? 5 years? 10 years? Indefinitely? And here 6 years later it is obvious to most very frequent fliers (at least here on FT) which subsidiary they are flying. And one poster even pointed out they try very hard to avoid sCO metal and are at lest a little more willing to fly sUA metal. This alone show disconnect. There are 2 different types of service on board (I won't go into one is better than the other argument). I still here some people on board say things that got something on one flight but don't on another flight. Shouldn't there be consistency? Part of the complaints we read about is the inconsistency they see.
Baze is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 12:00 pm
  #49  
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,429
Originally Posted by Baze
Part of the complaints we read about is the inconsistency they see.
But those were there before the merger @:-)

Back when flying was part of my work I had some VERY different experiences with both PMUA and PMCO

The only ones that were fairly consistent were AS and WN. And don't get me started on US and even bigger inconsistencies
EmailKid is online now  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 12:01 pm
  #50  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
One hurdle down. I don't have high hopes that it will pass a vote, but at least this should get to one. The FAs need to join their colleagues and get on board.
minnyfly is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 12:05 pm
  #51  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,762
Originally Posted by Baze
But how long can it go on for the health of the company? 5 years? 10 years? Indefinitely? And here 6 years later it is obvious to most very frequent fliers (at least here on FT) which subsidiary they are flying. And one poster even pointed out they try very hard to avoid sCO metal and are at lest a little more willing to fly sUA metal. This alone show disconnect. There are 2 different types of service on board (I won't go into one is better than the other argument). I still here some people on board say things that got something on one flight but don't on another flight. Shouldn't there be consistency? Part of the complaints we read about is the inconsistency they see.
there should definitely be consistency.

The sheer pettiness that drives these sorts of negotiations, such as whether or not to include x days of training (out of, in general, years) in seniority, seems silly.

And making seniority be the determiner of pretty much all benefits, like cherry-picking routes, is one of those things that drives people nuts about unions. It makes much more sense to score FA's on something like a 6-month rolling window based on performance (attendance, satisfaction scores, etc).
entropy is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 12:26 pm
  #52  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: san francisco
Programs: No airline status whatsoever, Chase URs, HHonors Diamond, IHG Platinum
Posts: 567
Great News

This is truly wonderful news; I just hope it works and United can move on. Talking with FAs, I've actually noticed a "happier" United over the past months. UA will now be able to devote time to giving us all better service. One can only hope!
jsn55 is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 12:29 pm
  #53  
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,429
Originally Posted by sbm12
Not so sure that makes it "MUCH" larger as an operator, even with more widebody aircraft pre-merger. Larger, sure, but no so sure it was that superlative.
Found CO pre merger fleet details, but somehow coming up short on UA.

At any rate, if the FA size was so similar, that would explain one of the problems in CO FAs not wanting to do more flying, since UA's fleet had a lot more lift, evidenced by (IIRC) premerger mania rankings with UA at #1, followed by AA and DL with CO coming in a distant fourth once it passed NW when NW downsized its fleet.

This is many moons ago, and my memory is a little fuzzy on the details, but remember well the post in now closed to posting CO forum where a poster described how much larger DL was than CO.
EmailKid is online now  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 1:10 pm
  #54  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,068
Originally Posted by sbm12
And the share price was 1.05:1 UA:CO at the time of the transaction.
What does share price have to do with anything?

WMT and TGT have share prices that are very similar, but WMT is by far the bigger company with much higher valuation.


Originally Posted by Baze
But how long can it go on for the health of the company? 5 years? 10 years? Indefinitely? And here 6 years later it is obvious to most very frequent fliers (at least here on FT) which subsidiary they are flying. And one poster even pointed out they try very hard to avoid sCO metal and are at lest a little more willing to fly sUA metal. This alone show disconnect. There are 2 different types of service on board (I won't go into one is better than the other argument). I still here some people on board say things that got something on one flight but don't on another flight. Shouldn't there be consistency? Part of the complaints we read about is the inconsistency they see.
It can go on forever if it's done correctly.

The only reason there should be consistency is because they're attempting to harmonize everything under one brand. If they had kept two brands, or branded each group as a different product, the differing service experiences would have been perfectly fine. Many companies segment their products and are more successful in doing so than the would be standardizing.

The problem with that approach is that it would have required introspection on the part of the United management team to understand the two customer bases, and what each side brought to the table. Their arrogance would have gotten in the way of completing that exercise.

Last edited by goalie; Jun 25, 2016 at 2:40 pm Reason: trolling reference replaced
channa is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 2:44 pm
  #55  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,613
Originally Posted by channa
The problem with that approach is that it would have required introspection on the part of the United management team to understand the two customer bases, and what each side brought to the table. Their arrogance would have gotten in the way of completing that exercise.
And it still gets in the way, because Smisek's departure didn't mean all the pmCO senior managers left with him.
halls120 is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 3:04 pm
  #56  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago
Programs: UA1MM*GL/1K, AA, BnVy PlatL, HH Silver,
Posts: 681
Originally Posted by halls120
And it still gets in the way, because Smisek's departure didn't mean all the pmCO senior managers left with him.
Yes exactly. Best outcome would be to let them fly the planes interchangeably but relegate them to the base of origin. sCO to IAH, Gum and EWR and sUA to the rest. That way either pax group knows what to expect and what to avoid. The biggest problem is the co-mingling of the "lines" through rival territory and from a pax perspective having no advance warning which side is staffing the 737-900s given the huge difference in service culture.
mike1968 is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 3:47 pm
  #57  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ORD
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Platinum/LT Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 5,594
Originally Posted by Baze
Is there any record of an airline splitting into 2 airlines? If they can't come to some compromise and get a unified contract might as well become a separate company.
This, to me, is a problem that only seems to exist within the minds of those here in the UA forum. Many companies have multiple unions, or union employees working peacefully next to non-union employees. Many have multiple brands with different levels of service, and sometimes even some animosity between employee groups in different business units -- especially in the years after a merger. It doesn't make them two companies, and in most cases we as customers never know.

The only thing customers will notice as a result of this (and most won't notice) is that replacement crews will be less of an issue in the future. I really don't believe that's a significant impact on UA's overall performance/operations, from a customer viewpoint.

If this is good for the FA's and improves UA's operations, that's a good thing. But I really don't think it's a significant event for us as customers.
JBord is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 4:12 pm
  #58  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
Originally Posted by JBord
This, to me, is a problem that only seems to exist within the minds of those here in the UA forum. Many companies have multiple unions, or union employees working peacefully next to non-union employees. Many have multiple brands with different levels of service, and sometimes even some animosity between employee groups in different business units -- especially in the years after a merger. It doesn't make them two companies, and in most cases we as customers never know.

The only thing customers will notice as a result of this (and most won't notice) is that replacement crews will be less of an issue in the future. I really don't believe that's a significant impact on UA's overall performance/operations, from a customer viewpoint.

If this is good for the FA's and improves UA's operations, that's a good thing. But I really don't think it's a significant event for us as customers.
Oh I understand different work groups and different unions within one company. But 2 groups doing the same job under the same header? FA's flying for United. Once inside the tube when flying United there should be no difference in service levels, types of service etc. It's not like different brands under GM where they are all GM cars, you know when you are getting into a Chevy vs a Buick. Now I've been very lucky and had great service overall from both sides but I can tell the difference in the services offered and how they give the service. It IS like flying 2 different airlines yet they are under the same banner with no sub name like Chevy or Buick. Once inside the tube no passenger should see the difference.
Baze is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 4:18 pm
  #59  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Originally Posted by channa
What does share price have to do with anything?
It demonstrates that the market cap (often used as a proxy for company size) was similar at the time of the merger.

Originally Posted by USAToday Merger Story
The market capitalization for UAL on Friday was $3.62 billion, while Continental's was $3.12 billion.
Like I said, larger but not worthy of the superlative.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2016, 6:22 pm
  #60  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,068
Originally Posted by sbm12
It demonstrates that the market cap (often used as a proxy for company size) was similar at the time of the merger.
No, it depends on how many shares each company had. That's the missing piece of your equation.
channa is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.