NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 11 months 20 hours ago) and read 2299 times:
Well I would love to see UA survive. I like the airline and their service is good. I wonder though. These employees give up so much for their airline to survive, when and if UA exits bankruptcy will their salaries be brought back? I just get tired of the employees bailing out the brass and saving the company and yet their paychecks get smaller.
StevenUhl777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 11 months 20 hours ago) and read 2293 times:
will their salaries be brought back?
I THINK so...don't hold me to that. I believe there is a clause in each of the new contract agreements that calls for a "snap back" in pay rate, which is a certain percentage each year of the agreement. The mechanic agreement included 1.5% increases each year, IIRC.
UALFAson From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 741 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (9 years 11 months 20 hours ago) and read 2281 times:
Depends on which union...my mom said one of the things she didn't like about the new FA contract is that there is NOT a provision for wage increases should the airline return to profitability--possibly part of the reason the FAs approved the new contract by a lower margin than the pilots.
Wonder what the mechanics will do now, now that the other unions have accepted their concessions? Certainly gives management more ammo to pressure them back to the table.
At least it's a couple of steps in the right direction for UA...
"We hope you've enjoyed flying with us as much as we've enjoyed taking you for a ride."
RyanAFAMSP From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 155 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 11 months 17 hours ago) and read 2206 times:
No, there are no "snap-back" provisions in the pilot or F/A agreements. There are a couple of very small pay build-backs later in the decade, but all terms of the agreement are permanent. The unions and the company go back into regular negotiations under the Railway Labor Act in 2010, beginning of course from the current contracts.
It is important to note the the flight attendant payscale is now almost exactly what it was in 1991, prior to the ratification of the 1996 contract. So for all of you who complain about airline workers being overpaid, I want you to just think for a second what it would be like to make what you did 14 years ago (if you were at the same job). I can't think of many successful companies that would ask an employee to work for half their career with no increase in pay and a significant decrease in benefits. But then again I have always said wage cuts guarantee nothing about the competitiveness of an operation.
Also it is important to point out that the primary reason the AMFA agreement failed is that if ratified, it would have eliminated the jobs of the majority of the workers, due to the outsourcing of heavy maintenance and fueling. So the vote was as follows for 56% of the seniority list:
YES(for concessions)= permanent job loss
NO (against concessions)= no guaranteed outcome, though deeply unstable situation will persist.
The bottom line is there is no way anyone should have expected this to pass. For most of the mechanics, they had to vote no just to live to risk it for another day.
Hawke187 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 11 months 13 hours ago) and read 2133 times:
You are mostly correct on the mechs, also there are no snap backs on any contract, in fact the contract last until 2010 for all groups and no provisions on reopening them if they exit BK and on the rare chance they start to make huge amount of money the only group not LOCKED into the agreed payscale is, guess who... Mgmt...
They can get raises and or bonuses at any time, but all the other group will be LOCKED into the scale until the end of the contract but rest assured there will be another "crisis, emergency, disaster, buyout, merger,ect…." when that day comes around... IMHO...