The beginning of the end?
 

I don't even know how to start this new thread... .

Another thread regarding the AFA and the threat of a strike was started some time ago. However, the following seems even more worrying:

http://www.unitedafa.org and http://www.unitedafa.org/res/b/n/prez_ltr_20041105.asp

I know that many of us just want to tell the flight attendants: "If you don't want to work, then just quit", but I doubt that many even care. I think it comes down to being together as a team, even if it means striking as a team, pushing the airline further down into liquidation as a team.

I don't like to think about it too much, but it seems a little as though United is coming closer and closer to a brink - even though several days ago I thought that UA was far from it.

So now my question is - what can we do? Hand out fliers on planes? - the FA's will probably spit in our food, the gate agents will bump us from flights, and the baggage handlers will destroy our luggage.

Write nice notes that we hand out at the end of the flight, asking the FA's to stay "United"?

Write a letter to the AFA?

There must be SOMETHING we can do!

I definately don't want "CHAOS"!

Edited to add summary of United demands from AFA website:
http://www.unitedafa.org/res/b/res/2_demand_sum.asp

:eek: ... ... :(

Wow. Seems serious to me.
 

Decades ago I worked as a flight attendant (for another airline). I can pretty much grasp some of the details that may appear as mere ciphers to those not acquainted with in-flight personnel contract language. So I realize the above links show union interpretation. But even allowing for union propaganda exaggeration, this is quite a takeaway.

The pay cuts are significant. But the rule changes are sweeping, which amounts to a huge increase of hours and days of labor. Diverse retirement bennies are cut back.

At first glance, I can't imagine any but the most desperate people to want this job. I can't imagine any union voting for anything like this. This really seems like the most serious challenge yet for UA to keep flying.

And I really do want UA to make it.

As much as one can complain about the prison matrons and their sometimes less than spectacular service, I actually feel a great deal of empathy for them from a labor perspective. While its true that the economics of commercial aviation have changed a great deal and continue to trend to more pressure to reduce costs, UA's employees have been asked to sacrifice a great deal in order to keep their jobs and the airline afloat. Perhaps if an employee is relatively low on the seniority scale it would be easy to simply bail out and find a new line of more lucrative employment. But for those employees that have been with UA for a long time, they may find themselves stuck with few options, except to be forced to weather more and more concessions. I recall a post here on FT from a UA employee based in SFO from a couple of years ago who wrote about the extremely high cost of living in the Bay Area while having to deal with the prospect of declining wages. I really felt badly for that employee. I think that its likely that many of us FTer's have incomes that are substantially higher than the average FA or UA groundstaff and perhaps even cockpit staff and it seems so easy for some of us to suggest to them to simply suck up the wage concessions and deal with it.

Dumb question perhaps. But when factoring in all these changes to the wages and work rules, how does (or will) a FA job at UA or AA compare in pay, benefits, hours, and work load to say Southwest or Jet Blue? Just curious.

Hello. Does anyone know when a decision to begin this type of action will be made?
Tattikat2

Not at all dump. A good question... . I was actually wondering the same thing :p

Anyway, back to being serious. As far as I know, some of the individual FA that are high, high, high in the seniority scale, actually earn quite a nice salary. I don't know if anyone knows approximate figures, but I am sure it is quite hefty.

At jetblue a friend of mine earns $6 an hour plus benefits (or something around that area).

When you click on one of the links, you can see that in the summary of the demands, one of the demands i that they should get rid of the 3-hour training pay. This means that if you earn less than 3 hours, you will get paid for the amount of time you worked. I am guessing that UA may have had many individuals who have had training sessions for half an hour, but still got paid for the full three hours (please correct me if I am wrong).

Something was also said with regards to vacation. United wants to cut the amount of vacation FA's have, but if you think about it, being able to fly all around the world is one of the most exciting perks of this job. And it is not like the FA's fly back three hours after they arrive in NRT from SFO - they have at least two days to explore the city and a new culture!

In addition, considering that each flight attendant only has to rack up a certain number of hours, all of the FA's who fly the long-haul routes, only have to fly a couple a month and can do whatever they want for the rest of their time - I have actually met a FA who was doing his graduate program at the same time! :eek:

Here is a summary of United's demands from the AFA website:

http://www.unitedafa.org/res/b/res/2_demand_sum.asp

Basically, it can happen any time. That is the scary part!!

On the training pay - I can see that being very annoying.

A 3 hour minimum would force UA to try and roster at least half a days worth of training each time someone is called in for training

If no minimum, UA could roster crew to come in for an hour long course only, that could still take up the whole day for a person (getting to and from the training centre etc.)

Can't answer the details, but any of the FAs with an IQ above 60 should realize that even if the grass is greener on the other side, if they force UA (and US) into liquidation, there's no way even 10% of them will be able to find jobs with the other carriers.

I have no qualms with the FA's but the reality is that it is a very low skill job in today's world and they are asking for wages for a job that anyone with probably a high school education can do. Maybe this is a job that needs to be outsourced. Anyway, if they strike it is adios for me from UA. :eek:

Here's a link to their contract which discusses pay scales.

http://www.unitedafa.org/res/cba/bb/05.htm

If I recall correctly most FA's get scheduled up to 92-93 hours from what I've been told.

To all the United FA's on FT, your work is highly appreciated and please don't let a few on here try to let you think otherwise.

Regarding the thread name:

I thought that the beginning of the end happened about 2 years ago in the filing of the Chapter 11 papers....

Never fly on a fare lower then H.

If we give UA tons of revenue, they can afford to pay their employees at the top end of the scale. Just like "The Happy Times" of the late 1990s.

I'm sure the FAs appreciate the smiles and politeness we give them, but I bet they'd much more appreciate an extra $100 in our ticket price.

Of course, most of us won't do that. And UA can only cut non-labor costs so much (you have to maintain the planes to FAA standards, you have to make your payments to the airplane and airport lessors, you need to fuel the planes to get them to their destination).

They've shed over $2.5 billion in non-labor costs, and they've shed over $2.5 billion in labor costs. And passenger revenues are up a few tens of millions (maybe hundreds). Yet fuel prices have doubled in a year, UA is still spending hundreds of millions on re-organization costs, and pricing pressures remain, helping to hold down those passenger revenue increases.

So UA has to cut labor costs again - through layoffs and wage/benefit concessions.

If the unions don't want to accept it, then they have the option of going on unemployment.

They just need to decide whether or not they want to do it individually, or en masse.

I have a vested interest in UA flying, but if they do go under, I'll just fly a whole lot less and use the money for other things.

This surely isn't going to help the situation:

United cabin staff prepare to launch CHAOS campaign
Dateline: Friday November 19, 2004

United Airlines' flight attendants plan to use CHAOS (create havoc across our system) job actions should the US Bankruptcy Court agree to the carrier's request to abrogate its contract with the Assn. of Flight Attendants.

According to the union, the legally required 30-day cooling-off period before a strike does not apply when a bankruptcy court agrees to reject a contract.

Under CHAOS, flight attendants do not walk off the job en masse, a step that would result in the shutdown of the airline with resultant loss of cash flow. Instead, the union targets particular cities and flights for limited surprise walkouts that temporarily disrupt operations and annoy passengers while causing a steady erosion of customer support for the airline.
link here