djmp

Interesting read from Inc. https://www.inc.com/chris-matyszczyk...heres-why.html

Per FT rule,

Quote:

Don't simply post a link by itself to another source, such as an article or blog. ... Posts containing such links should contain enough information so as to be contributive to FlyerTalk itself.

The gist of the article is inequalities of the seniority lists and the continued use of two separate work scheduling systems, is the source of dissatification among some senior FA's
A key quote

Quote:

The result, the senior disgruntled Flight Attendant told me, is that most of the international flights are operated by the Continental half of the airline, while the United part stays at home and does the cleaning.

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator

pinerd

Looks like discontent is still high as management continues to screw things up:
https://www.inc.com/chris-matyszczyk...heres-why.html

claaaaaydavis

Very good read. Not to mention how much so many of them lost in previous bankruptcies.

fumje

That is an interesting tidbit about the international routes going mostly to sCO. I had not heard that before, although I had been forming that impression. Out of curiosity, does anyone have a list of which INT'L routes are sUA and which are sCO, or at least a count of each?

TA

Well, I hate to be the target of flames, but I think a major part of the problem of disgruntled flight attendants is... that we have disgruntled senior flight attendants...

I don't think anyone really intended the FA job to be a position for life. And the more someone stays in this job, the more the everyday inevitable conflicts start to wear on you and the less enthusiastic / willing to be inconvenienced you are. It is a human biological unavoidable consequence of working customer service.

Certainly the systems for scheduling, seniority, etc should be fixed. But a major problem would be resolved if it were agreed from the start of employment, that being an FA is a fixed maximum of (x) years job and then move onto better things (even within the airline if possible).

There is a reason young startup airlines initially so better than legacy carriers. People don't come in expecting things to be done a certain way, and aren't saddled with the baggage (mental, technological) of systems from 30 years ago.

2stepbay

I agree. Amazing anyone has the stamina to work as a FA for 20+ years and remain enthusiastic. Biggest challenge with attaining job security may be complacency.

demkr

Interesting how the non-union airline (DL) doesn't have this particular problem.....Does the fact that sUA/sCO FA's *still* can't go outside their respective pre-merger carrier effect aircraft route scheduling/ability to swap ACs during irrops?

claaaaaydavis

A lot of the more senior ones are still there because they got kind of hosed in the bankruptcy of 2002.

restlessinRNO

One tires of listening to the complaints of UA's union "senior disgruntled Flight Attendants".

porciuscato

When you reward employees for face time, instead of work quality (whether in airlines, the Post Office, or public schools), this is the inevitable consequence. Bitter employees hang on instead of leaving because the marginal benefit of staying is so high. Good employees leave early because the marginal benefit for them is low.

US Airlines (and United in particular) need to change their whole mindset.

* Stop the idiotic celebrations of flight attendants who have worked for 30,40, 50 years. Instead, celebrate the ones who do the best job.
* Introduce merit pay in lieu of face-time pay.
* Introduce rigorous fitness tests like the ones that every quality international carrier has (Lufthansa, Swiss, etc.). After all, they are there "primarily for our safety." An obese, unfit FA does not enhance anyone's safety.

lupine

I've had older FA's who've done a great job, and younger FA's who've slacked, and vice-versa. Age (or years of employment) shouldn't ever enter into the picture and would directly contravene US law. Age discrimination is rampant enough in the US; we don't need more. There should be evaluation on performance. That's it. (The flight attendants on the "Miracle on the Hudson" flight were 51, 58, and 57 at the time of the accident. These "old" flight attendants did a remarkable job.)

TA

Well, 2 thoughts.

1) As long as the airline has no way of evaluating the performance of FAs in an objective way, we are stuck with a seniority-based system for advancement, pay raises, and route bidding.

2) if that is true, then I suggest that having people sign up for the job with an expectation that it is a time-limited term is how to fix things.

I too agree that age itself is not the determining factor. But number of years in the job is, strongly. Having a way for people to experience and be good at the job, and then leave, would serve the airlines well.

I would also suggest that most (>99.99%) of any average FAs performance to the public does not involve being evaluated on evacuating a plane. That is done behind the scenes in airline certification / FA qualification and training. The rest of the job is how they serve the public.

halls120

I completely agree with this suggestion.

that's why you shouldn't use age as the determinant for fitness. Actual fitness ought to be a job requirement.

Toshbaf

Maybe FA should be promoted to senior FA for good performance and FA's with longevity should be promoted to senior agent. The duties of senior agent would have more prestige because their uniform would have an additional stripe. Their duties would include baggage handling.

3Cforme

I'm not sure what you mean by this particular problem for DL FAs. Yes, the FA groups got integrated but it took several years. During that time NW FAs didn't work with DL FAs. NW FAs didn't work with DL pilots. There was a hotly contested election to see if the NW union would be retained. The election was much delayed because the union set the timing, not the company. It occurred about 24 months after the merger's financial transaction was done.

Following the merger, unions waited to call for a vote until the Obama administration had nominated two-thirds of the board that would oversee the elections; asked those appointees to change the election rules in their favor; delayed the elections so that they would take place under the new rules; lost anyway; and are now alleging “interference” on Delta’s part — allegations that the board can use to demand a new vote.

Read more at: | National Review

If you mean there are no unhappy Delta FAs... I might say the fraction of grumpy FAs is smaller at Delta. The company has enjoyed a pretty consistent growth trajectory for the past six or seven years. It's probably improved the attitude of 15-year FAs, knowing they're not still toward the bottom of the seniority list. Profit sharing has topped $1 Billion three years in a row.