Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CO Fa's Pay Cut Details......  
User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3924 posts, RR: 7
Posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3964 times:

apparently (heard two hours ago from fa) someone on the inside is leaking the information that this new proposal on top of what was already voted down is a 9-11% pay reduction...if so you wonder why they voted the first offer down...now their base pay is being reduced.


okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3924 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3962 times:

other details leaking are that the company has already gotten approval from the FAA to train brand new flight attendants in a one week class on only 1 aircraft type.....and the ability to fire those FAs who go on strike.......


okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineCoa764 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 328 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3939 times:

I heard from a guy that is friends with another guy that knows this girl that is roommates with someone's cousin that knows a another girl that is dating a guy that said since the in-flight brief is automated airlines are going to petition the FAA to reduce the Flight Attendant compliment on an aircraft from one per 50 seats to one per 80 seats.   

[Edited 2005-04-03 08:41:56]


Please oh please Mr Moderator Nazi, dont delete my thread.
User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3916 times:

Texas is a right to work state, so the company has the upper hand in its dealings with Houston Based attendents.


"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13517 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3873 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As I said earlier this week, the company's previous proposal was the most generous the flight attendants were going to see. Now that they've pissed on everyone else by voting it down, subsequent contract proposals will get worse and worse at time goes by.

Even the IAM's press releases announcing the failure to ratify the previous agreement smacked of a "WTF?!?" view.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3820 times:

This thread is pretty lame for a number of reasons:

1) Every single one of us that voted yes is going to get screwed here. Basically all the junior flight attendants from EWR voted down a contract that everyone else voted yes on.

2) They should have the contract be activated for all Flight attendants that voted yes, and all the flight attendants that voted no should then be left to fight it out to see what they think they can get.

3) While I do not believe that your "insider information" is accurate, if it is, I would say that it is pretty lame of you, and / or the Union person to leak it to the public before any of the people who's livelyhood depends on it.

4) I have seen several comments on here about how "flight attendants can look forward to lots of middle seats etc". Try to remember that here in IAH most of us voted yes.


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5731 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3648 times:

Sorry you're gettin' the short end of the stick, Artsyman.
I am just a passenger... but as I passenger I hate to think that customer service is about to drop off completely when the FA's get ticked.
Good luck in the coming weeks...
R


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6579 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3625 times:

Why can't the FA's just keep voting no, everytime CO makes the contract worse? CO isn't going to file BK over $82 million in FA concessions. I guess the other labor groups could protest, but otherwise the FA's might actually have CO management by the cajones.

User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4336 posts, RR: 19
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3621 times:

"CO isn't going to file BK over $82 million in FA concessions."

Probably not, but managment does have the option of furloughing FAs till they're blue-and-gold in the face.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3610 times:

Quoting Ejmmsu (Reply 3):
Texas is a right to work state, so the company has the upper hand in its dealings with Houston Based attendents.

No they don't. Air transport is interstate commerce and governed by federal law.

Quoting CALMSP (Reply 1):
and the ability to fire those FAs who go on strike.......

The FAA cannot grant that and CO does not have that right. In fact, it is because of CO that you cannot use Ch. 11 to do that.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3803 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

Quoting CALMSP (Thread starter):
someone on the inside is leaking the information that this new proposal on top of what was already voted down is a 9-11% pay reduction...if so you wonder why they voted the first offer down...now their base pay is being reduced

So what? Had they voted yes instead of no on round one, they would have inevitably been voting for the proposal quoted above (or worse) in round two in the very near future when -- not if -- it is discovered that round one cuts were not deep enough to subsidize management's inability or refusal to come to terms with costs that have actually put CO in their current position and will keep them there regardless of how much employees are willing to give back.

Should be obvious enough to any and all who have "eyes to see and ears to hear" what history has plainly taught those who choose to pay attention and learn from what has happened in the past -- and present in the case of the legacy airline industry.


User currently offlineFetheroleather From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3462 times:

Quoting Artsyman (Reply 5):
1) Every single one of us that voted yes is going to get screwed here. Basically all the junior flight attendants from EWR voted down a contract that everyone else voted yes on.

Not true.Id like to know where you get these "facts"about how the vote was broken down.Wasnt the IAH yes vote only @200 more than the no votes?

Quoting Artsyman (Reply 5):
2) They should have the contract be activated for all Flight attendants that voted yes, and all the flight attendants that voted no should then be left to fight it out to see what they think they can get.

Are you serious?

Quoting Artsyman (Reply 5):
4) I have seen several comments on here about how "flight attendants can look forward to lots of middle seats etc". Try to remember that here in IAH most of us voted yes.

I can see it now."Did you vote yes? Heres your window seat.Oh my, you voted no,hope the large person next to you doesnt snore."With comments like these,are you really a CAL employee?

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 8):
Probably not, but managment does have the option of furloughing FAs till they're blue-and-gold in the face.



Quoting Avek00 (Reply 8):
"CO isn't going to file BK over $82 million in FA concessions."

Probably not, but managment does have the option of furloughing FAs till they're blue-and-gold in the face.

Is that kind of threat/fear ploy supposed to scare people?

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 4):
As I said earlier this week, the company's previous proposal was the most generous the flight attendants were going to see. Now that they've pissed on everyone else by voting it down, subsequent contract proposals will get worse and worse at time goes by.
They are smart enough to realixe that theyn have to save face and posture, but the sky is falling mantra aint working
Even the IAM's press releases announcing the failure to ratify the previous agreement smacked of a "WTF?!?" view.

IAM chose to emphasize 2-3 mediocre plusses,rather than the many other negatives about this whole deal.I think they are in such a state of shock right now,they dont know what to do.


User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3277 times:

Not true.Id like to know where you get these "facts"about how the vote was broken down.Wasnt the IAH yes vote only @200 more than the no votes?
****

You could offer 8000 people oral sex for hours on end and still have half of them vote no. The fact is, IAH voted yes by a long way. CLE was borderline, EWR was not even close.

Are you serious?
****

Nope

I can see it now."Did you vote yes? Heres your window seat.Oh my, you voted no,hope the large person next to you doesnt snore."With comments like these,are you really a CAL employee?
****

The last part is a tough question as both my wife and I post here. She is a CAL flight attendant, and has been for 17 years.

In the words of Sargant Hulka, "Lighten up Francis"...

J


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2715 times:

Quoting CALMSP (Reply 1):
other details leaking are that the company has already gotten approval from the FAA to train brand new flight attendants in a one week class on only 1 aircraft type.....and the ability to fire those FAs who go on strike.......

That's union busting, and it would mean big trouble if CO tried that, so I'm a little dubious of it. The other unions would walk out, contract or no, and not cross a f/a picket line for that.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 4):
As I said earlier this week, the company's previous proposal was the most generous the flight attendants were going to see.

Agreed. A lot of green, in the sense of union-labor relations, f/a's are in for a rude awakening in the next few months.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 10):
So what? Had they voted yes instead of no on round one, they would have inevitably been voting for the proposal quoted above (or worse) in round two in the very near future when -- not if -- it is discovered that round one cuts were not deep enough to subsidize management's inability or refusal to come to terms with costs that have actually put CO in their current position and will keep them there regardless of how much employees are willing to give back.

A long, roundabout sentence, filled with union PR. There MAY be a round two-with gas prices soaring (see the story about the prices spiking at $105 per barrell?), but guess what, there are no guarantees in life, Tango-Bravo. If you want such a guarantee, you won't get it. Think about that.


User currently offlineIAHTowTeam From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2672 times:

Since when are we talking about a strike here....that is a rediculous idea, at this time. Odds are, they now feel pressured to ratify a new contract, at least I hope so. The sooner we can get this behind us, the better. I wonder what the sentiment of the F/A's is, now that they know everyone gave something, except for them? If they don't like their union than ratify the new agreement and get rid of them...don't take everyone else in the company down with them, suck it up, then take care of business. If you want a new union to represent you....then stop wasting time, ours, yours and theirs!

User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12903 posts, RR: 100
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2628 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Artsyman (Reply 5):
2) They should have the contract be activated for all Flight attendants that voted yes, and all the flight attendants that voted no should then be left to fight it out to see what they think they can get.

Illegal by the railway labor act which like it or not covers the airlines.

Personally, I hope this is resolved soon. Its my understanding that the "sticky wicket" was the added work hours. With the cost of benefits today, CO must reduce the head count and get up efficiency. Obviously no FA wants to vote away their job...

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 10):
it is discovered that round one cuts were not deep enough to subsidize management's inability or refusal to come to terms with costs that have actually put CO in their current position

???? The current CO management seems to be doing a good job. Now, past CO management (Lorenzo) sent the airline into the current downturn weaker than it should have been due to the legacy of the prior CO BK's. All of the majors have to cut costs. CO just has a little more urgency due to the bond refinancing required this year. Having the bond financing occur this far after the start of a downturn seems like good management; who would have predicted the market would still be down this much over three years later? Normal cycles haven't been THAT brutal before.

Personally, I find it smart that CO is trying to expand; one never downsizes to greatness. The increased trans Atlantic revenue should help CO pull out of their profit funk.

My one critacism of CO management is the size of the RJ fleet. I won't repeat my other posts in other forums noting my bearishness on 50 seat RJ's.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2536 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 15):
My one critacism of CO management is the size of the RJ fleet. I won't repeat my other posts in other forums noting my bearishness on 50 seat RJ's.

Critisize it all you want, bit it's one of the things that saved the CO system after 9/11. It gave the airline the flexibility to put the right aircraft in the right market, and not have the excess capacity other larger carriers are still struggling with.


User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 204 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2461 times:

Just vote no again. They won't file bankruptcy and a strike won't happen. They really can't furlough without cutting capacity. They won't cut capacity over a f/a contract. IAM just needs to stand strong. Best of luck to all CAL f/a's. Some labor group has to put an end to this madness.

User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2443 times:

Quoting TWAL1011 (Reply 17):
Best of luck to all CAL f/a's. Some labor group has to put an end to this madness.

Screw those f/a's who live in such a fantasy world. I notice you didn't say "best of luck to CAL", just the f/a's. If the f/a's can't be team players, I have no use for 'em.

They will end up taking cuts, or be parriah's within the work forces. It's only a matter of time and only a matter of what the deal will be.


User currently offlineHighguy76 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 184 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2354 times:

Falcon84, I think you are taking an extreme position here.
We didn't vote no on this TA because we did not want to take concessions. We weren't trying to flip the bird to the rest of the company and all our co-workers. We are more than willing to take concessions.
We simply wanted the IAM to work with us on how and where those cuts took place. We wanted a say in the negotiations. We wanted cuts to be made fairly across the board, instead of some FAs taking a 15%-20% cut, and others taking a 4% or 5% cut.
Until we see these things happen, we will continue to vote no, and as we have seen, that won't hurt any other work group at all.

You are trying to make us out to be company and co-worker hating monsters. Nothing is further from the truth. I love my job, and the people I work with (all of them) but I wish to be treated fairly. Don't you?


User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3924 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2339 times:

Highguy76....you dont agree with everyone taking a proportionate pay cut equal to others based on their pay?


okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 21, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2325 times:

Quoting CALMSP (Reply 20):
Highguy76....you dont agree with everyone taking a proportionate pay cut equal to others based on their pay?

Before I comment, let it be known that we voted yes to the concessions. Highguy76's point is that the pay cut % within the fa group did not split evenly.

Juniors were taking up to I believe 14% while the more senior fa was as low as 4.4%.

The work rule changes were different within the ranks also. For example, a senior flight attendant did not lose a week of vacation and the pay that comes with it, yet the junior flight attendants do.

While I did not believe the contract was bad enough to reject, I do understand why SOME people rejected it, but I also believe that most of the no voters did not even read the offer, and are just like annoyedfa who stated "I do not care what they offer, I'll vote no"

Also, contrary to popular opinion on here, most of the fellow employees from the other work groups have actually been applauding the flight attendants for having the balls to say no.

Whatever the case, I think the offer should have been accepted in general.


User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3924 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2311 times:

well i havent run into anyone who stated they were applauding the "no" vote....but i am rather surprised about the % points based on the seniority...but % of what?


okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12903 posts, RR: 100
Reply 23, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2277 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 16):
Critisize it all you want, bit it's one of the things that saved the CO system after 9/11. It gave the airline the flexibility to put the right aircraft in the right market, and not have the excess capacity other larger carriers are still struggling with.

Oh, the RJ's served CO well the last few years no doubt. Maybe I should have written a longer expose'. But, In my opinion, CO has too many RJ's now. I'm not saying 50 seaters are all bad, just that a lower CASM airframe would be better here going forward for them.

Now, Its also my understanding that CO played off Embraer vs. Bombardier for a good deal on their RJs. I very much enjoyed flying on the CO ERJ-135 from BDL to CLE in the 2000/2001 time frame. But with oil at $58/bbl, the RJ's make less sense. Agree? Disagree?

Quoting Artsyman (Reply 21):
Juniors were taking up to I believe 14% while the more senior fa was as low as 4.4%.

Wow, the highest salaries take the least hit?!?

I'll be curious to see how this all plays out.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineHighguy76 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 184 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2217 times:

Quoting CALMSP (Reply 22):
but i am rather surprised about the % points based on the seniority...but % of what?

A lot of issues go into making up the FA contract, seniority being the biggest one, of course, but we are also dealing with loss of vacation days; loss of extra pay for various posistions on the ac (international, service managers and lead fa, galley pay, ect.);movement of our pension plan to IAM control (currently run by CO); work rules for people who have been on reserve for 7-8 years or more; and lots of other things.
According to CO, each of these issues has a monetary value when negotiated for by our union, so we use those numbers to figure what % of pay and benefits we would lose in any given agreement. It's different for each individual, depending on where you stand on all of these issues.

I have a question for other CO employees, especially those of you who are not unionized (CSAs, ect.) I know you guys have various posistions in your workgroup as well (red coats, language speakers, ect.) I assume those of you in these posistions earn extra pay for them. Did these issues play a part in the cuts you are taking, or was it just a % of your base pay that was lost?
I mean no sarcasam or venom here. Understanding what kind of cuts everyone else is taking helps shape my ideas of how I will vote on this next proposal.


25 CALMSP : basically CSAs lost everything...........the only thing we didnt lose was RedCoat/Lead CSA override, but only for the designated work that we do....if
26 Artsyman : but i am rather surprised about the % points based on the seniority...but % of what? **** Basically, if every flight attendant took their usual schedu
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
CO Employees Take Pay Cut posted Thu Nov 18 2004 23:29:47 by Ewrw4co
UA FA's Offer To Take Pay Cut posted Sun Oct 27 2002 02:58:53 by Sleekjet
ComAir To Impose FA Pay Cuts posted Mon Oct 9 2006 22:20:10 by ATLAaron
Steenland Takes A Pay Cut posted Tue May 2 2006 23:29:20 by Kjet12
Delta Pay Cut Deal A Rare Win For Pilots posted Mon Dec 12 2005 23:18:03 by Sunking737
CO FA's Reach New Contract posted Thu Dec 8 2005 23:24:15 by JEdward
CO FA Paycuts..... posted Fri Nov 18 2005 17:52:09 by CALMSP
NW Pilots Approve Pay Cut posted Tue Nov 15 2005 04:06:29 by PhilSquares
Indy Workforce Cut Vs. Exec Pay Cut posted Tue Jun 21 2005 22:50:10 by Lightsaber
AS Pilots Taking 26% Pay Cut posted Sun May 1 2005 04:35:44 by WeAreUnited