boomerang-boy

Reuters reported today that the The AFA (Association of Flight Attendants) mailed 21,000 strike authorization ballots to flight attendants at United Airlines, setting the stage for a possible work stoppage if the airline repeals a collective bargaining agreement.
What do you think will happen and would this be a smar move for the AFA at this time in United's bankruptcy?

exerda

Personally, I think it would be suicide for the FAs to vote to strike, because no matter how bad it is for them now, if they strike, UA goes down the tubes and so do their jobs. It's not like they'll be able to get jobs with other carriers, either.

I do hope the UA execs are either deferring or taking extremely reduced salaries during this time, too, to set the example that they are doing their parts to save $$s, but somehow I doubt it.

Explore

They have also sent strike ballots to FAs at USAirways, ATA, and Hawaiian. I assume an extended strike would liquidate the airlines concerned, which Continental would heartedly applaud. I think the only way out would be for a judge to order the strikers back immediately. Would this be legal?

FWAAA

IMO, a strike would mean instant liquidation. But then again, abrogation of contracts, if it happens, will probably cause a strike. Accordingly, it looks very bleak right now for UAL's employees.

Legal? Nobody really knows. The RLA greatly restricts the ability of airline workers to strike, but if a court tosses the contract, the employees probably become employees at will, which would allow them to "strike" if they wished.

Order them back to work? Hard to say whether the employees would "have" to work. Contract abrogation isn't like a typical airline strike situation.

exerda

There was some talk when the AFA started discussing strike options that the courts would indeed rule the strike illegal and order the FAs back to work (and those not going to work could be fired and potentially in legal hot water, too).

That said, if the workers simply don't show up for a couple of days, the FAA rules would keep planes grounded I would think (not having minimum # of FAs on flights), and the airlines would be liquidated, and EVERYONE would lose their jobs, most of them for good. Holding the strikers in contempt of court at that point would be pretty useless IMHO.

UNITED959

I've heard that, in general, the ones who want to strike are our beloved gum-chewing prison matrons. The ones who remember when it was really something to be an FA, not just a peanut bag distributor and drink pourer.

As a rule, it seems the younger lot of FAs (many of who have been furloughed due to their young seniority) have much better customer service skills and truly love their job -- they accept the very low pay in exchange for the position's duties simply because they enjoy what they do.

I say let the old b*tches go and bring the fun and upbeat FAs out of furlough. If strike-provokers don't want to work for UA, tell them to find one of the exits, keeping in mind their closest exit may be behind them.

Mr. Santa Barbara

Thank you for the LOL of the day!

SEA_Tigger

If AFA takes any airline down with a strike, I imagine it will be US. And they just might do it, to put the fear of God (or C7) into UA and DL when it comes to negotiating more wages reductions.

thezipper

If/ When is this vote suppose to take place?

NCRBILL

I can't believe all the FA would strike at the same time. If that would happen, then US Air would go under, UA, Hawaiian and ATA would follow. Then what would they have? Nothing but the paper they voted on to stand. You can't go after a company in BK and ask them to give you the same pay as you had in the past. This is the reason they asked for the cuts in the first place.

I think they need to take the cuts, work out of BK with the company and then go back to the tables and get better pay. It might not be where they were at one time but I do feel it will be equal if not more than they have currently.

I've always said a little bit of something is a lot better than a whole lot of nothing.

Not sure if they really want the nothing over the something?????

SFO 1K

FWIW, I recently flew on two Int'l trips and in each direction the FA serving me had over 30 years. Both were beyond outstanding in their service and one was so sassy, when she poured a little too much champagne and it splashed on my knee she wiped it with her finger and said - "oops, I might have to lick that up!" The entire cabin burst out laughing. (Upper Deck).

The trip ended with a personal handshake from this lady with a heart felt "Thanks for flying with us today, we appreciate your business and hope to see you onboard again soon." as she finished doing that with 28 C pax, she promptly strapped in just as we were going over the numbers into SFO. CLASSY!

I haven't seen any of the young'ins pulling that off.

MSY-MSP

To be perfectly honest, I believe that the AFA will, and wants to take down one of these four airlines. If nothing more, than to prove a point, that they are willing to go that far. However, I do believe that a strike at UA is a low priority for AFA. I think they want the authorization to hold over UA's head. The reason I believe this is that it is in AFA's (the union, not members) best interest to keep UA around. Why? UA FA's make up a vast majority of the FA's in AFA 21000 vs US's 5000. To have UA fold would decimate the union dues roles, with no gaurentee that they would ever end up working for an AFA carrier again. Thus AFA's income would crash hard.

I think the other thing going for UA in this instance is that US is 2-4 months ahead of them in cancelling contracts. UA doesn't even have its hearing until January, and US is having theirs today. Odds are the judge in US will throw out the contracts. I think AFA will strike, and take down US, much like IAM did with Eastern. It is an easier bullet for the AFA to take down US then UA.

As for the other two airlines in this senario. Hawaiian is its own animal. so anything that happens there is so different than the rest of the industry. ATA is too small and not well known enough in the public eye, that most would hardly blink if they went under. Which is why US and UA are really the only games in town for the AFA. And AFA's best interests say take down the smaller of the two, and hope it scares the bejesus out of the other.

Those are just my opinions I could be wrong.

PremEx

I think it would be the last strike United ever has.

Unfortunately, even just the possibility of a strike can have serious implications for United. Many corporate accounts are hanging with United by a thread already. Just the news of a possible strike in the works could be that last straw for many.

Even at other companies without contracts, news of a strike possibility can solicit instructions from corporate officers to avoid flying that particular airline for the time being. And even that temporary and preemptive type of boycott can have serious financial implications. Perhaps even fatal in United's case.

LarryJ

Nobody wants to strike but it's the only leverage that a union has in negotiation. They hope that the credible threat of a strike will convince the company to negotiate and reach a negotiated settlement. OTOH, if the company thinks that they are bluffing then there is no leverage so they really do have to be ready to strike (i.e. very high percentage strike vote, active preparations for a strike, etc.).

UNITED959

Don't get me wrong, there are some excellent 'grannies' out there...which is why I said "in general."

I think what you experienced was a stellar FA in all aspects -- and there are a few in the making that I've noticed.

Hate to generalize myself, but sometimes there is some merit.

Had a great purser last year on NRT-LAX on the upper deck, and she told me it was her 35th year. Also had a great FA on SNA-ORD a month ago in F...she could have been my little sister (I'm 25, so not my child... )