ClipperClub

You are very presumptuous....

One does not have to take a forced transfer. This is a signed agreement. If someone would rather find another job, then the status would be termination.

It may sound easy for a move, but for those with families moving may not be an option. Therefore there are rules to follow and not some blurry line.

France only allowed this base to be set up with confirmation that local laws would be met.

I find it more honest for the French government to put the burden of redundancies on the corporation than the taxpayer.....United knew this going in.

How many of us have thought about the fact that United dropped the ball on this base closure until after much of the CH11 process had been completed. It would not have looked as good on the bottom line, and perhaps may not have provided as much money for the management team to squirrel away.

Aluminum tubing

"two of the FAs were rather opinionated about the quality of the US vs CDG-based FAs, the feeling being that the French (there, I said it) FAs tended to hold their noses up in the air a bit."

I would have to say that opinion comes from the fact that the FA profession outside the US holds higher respect. To become a FA for a major carrier is very tough (even at UA,AA,SQ ,LH etc...) In the US many pax tend to see the FA as cocktail servers in the air.

So... one is left to wonder if either US-based FAs aren't quite as sympathetic to the plight of their CDG cousins as they might be, and/or if perhaps there's a different sense of status depending upon your domocile? And maybe if you're from the CDG domicile you don't look forward to being tossed in with the riff-raff elsewhere?

Part of the reason some US-based FA's aren't so sympathetic is that FA's based overseas only fly int'l routes from the start. At UA we paid more to work an Int'l trip then a domestic trip. So the have and have-nots come in to play. Int'l based FA's don't work TED, multi legs, no narrowbodies etc... so to many US FA's the int'l FA's have it easy since they don't work TED, multi legs, no narrowbodies etc.... UA is closing the FA bases in EWR and PHL in May too. The CDG FA's that don't have the right to work in the US will be offered and int'l base like LHR,NRT, & FRA so the biggest problem for them will be the tougher and expensive commute to work, which some US FA's have done for many years.

Fly

United can and will be able to fire them if they choose to strike because it isn't a legitimate strike (notice how they only mention the closing of their base...typical, selfish CDG). They have been offered other bases to work out of so they have no basis to strike. Besides, ALL of the AFA f/a's have to go on strike together AND have to have a strike vote from ALL f/a's, neither which will happen. Sounds like typical French whining to me.

fyi - The reason they are not going to have a leg to stand on about this issue is that the first question on every flight attendant application asks "Are you willing to relocate?" Although they were hired for CDG, that question had to be answered with a YES or they were not considered for the job. So all these people obviously checked off the YES box.

tom911

Clearly a lot of us here (me) are not up on what the contract says, and if it allows UA to transfer people if they don't want to be transferred, and how French law fits into this. Will be interesting to follow in the weeks ahead. If I was a life long resident of France, I'm not sure I'd be jumping for joy at transferring out of the country if it's not written somewhere that UA is allowed to do that. I'd probably stay behind in France and do something else.

Teeejay

Here is the response from WHQ:

In the wake of an announcement that United will
close the Paris, Philadelphia and Newark flight
attendant domiciles, the Association of Flight
Attendants (AFA) on Tuesday, Feb. 7, issued a press
release which stated that local union leaders in
Paris have directed the AFA's Master Executive
Council to prepare for a strike. The company has
responded with the following statement:

Under the U.S. collective bargaining agreement that
governs flight attendant employment, the AFA has no
right to strike. The flight attendants have been
offered continuing employment at United, and the
company will reimburse expenses associated with
relocation to other domiciles. United
representatives from Onboard Service and Human
Resources have held three meetings with flight
attendants at the Paris domicile and additional
meetings in EWR and PHL since the announcement of
the closure to answer their questions and provide
details about transfer options. We also discussed
in detail with AFA the timing and bidding schedule
for those flight attendants and took a number of the
union's suggestions.

We are committed to working cooperatively with the
AFA on this matter. To that end, we have encouraged
AFA leadership to focus their attention on a smooth
transition for our flight attendants, rather than on
press releases that are without fact and without
merit, and do nothing but worry our customers, our
employees and our shareholders needlessly.

markontime

Hmmm. All 258 FA's want to participate in this strike. Not ONE of them is interested in staying with UA and relocating? There's something here more than just French benefits. Sharon Caldwell, sounds very French to me, no? I also agree that the timing of this announcement is significant. Base closings are base closings. Stuff happens. But, in this case, I believe there should be more scrutiny. Moving from EWR or PHL to IAD or ORD is NOTHING like moving from CDG to LRH or FRA and I find it hard to make the comparison. I am all for UA cost-cutting, but it's clear to me that this business decision to cut costs happenend outside CH11 because they knew it was an unsavory can of worms.

Fly

How about when they closed Miami? That's a MUCH farther commute than CDG to LHR. What about the forced surplus out of HNL? I think that was a very difficult commute. Much more difficult than CDG to LHR or FRA.

Again, the application was very clear when it asked if they were willing to relocate and all had to say YES to be considered. The contract allows base closures and they do it. Most recently they closed TPE and made them commute too. I believe the reason they want unemployment is because (I have heard) the benefits last 3 years and pay about the same as they made at United. Socialists you know.

ClipperClub

The company has always expressed its displeasure with commuting. Im not sure being forced to commute is a wise idea, as the company has used it against flight attendants thousands of times. If you dont make it to work, it is always your own responsibility......and the company will never take the side of the employee when he/she fails to get to work. Forcing someone into that situation is like a time-bomb.

Id watch how you throw the word socialist around.....you make it sound like communism. FlyerTalk is FILLED with "socialists" as you put it. It is offensive, but Im sure you know how you intended it to sound.

osxanalyst

The only functional difference between socialism and communism is that the former is an elected form of government and the latter is not. The theory is far more complicated, but political theory never works in real life.

thegingerman

sounds like socialism to me.

CAL PHL FLYER

They should just Fire the strikers and replace them with the FA they are training now..making hardly any money,lol.

Babu

Me too. Considering (1) UA staffs these flights with American based FAs as well as CDG FAs, and (2) UA only flies to SFO (used to, anyway), CDG and IAD once daily, how did 282 of them keep a full flying schedule?

LAXNRT

Flew FRA-SFO yesterday and talked to an older FA about the Paris base closure. I was shocket to find out that she was all for it, her words were "we are an American carrier and should have only US based FAs that are American". I didn't have a reply for that, was a bit shocked especially since we had some "foreign" FAs on the flight.

flyinbob

While some of us may find offense in socialism itself, the word is perfectly acceptable and cannot be considered offensive in the course of this discussion. Political policies of European nations in general and France in particular enter into United operations, so it should be discussed.

albfamily

Late to join this thread, but as an American who spent 5 years living and working in France and flying many times on UA between Paris and the US I feel I need to chime in.

Paris based flight attendants on UA are no better or worse then US based flight attendants. They all have their good and bad days, but my positive experiences in both C and Y on CDG flights far outnumber my negative experiences.

Personally, I envy French employment laws. The French employment laws guaranty a small but important amount of job security for long term employees of large corporations. They also have medical care, holiday and leave of absence rights. We can put whatever political label we want on it, but the bottom line is the French value their quality of life and through their laws minimize abuse of those rights by large corporations.


Allen