JEdward From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 133 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2611 times:
HOUSTON, Dec. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Continental Airlines (NYSE: CAL) today issued the following bulletin to update employees about negotiations with its flight attendants' union, the International Association of Machinists (IAM):
Continental Airlines is pleased to confirm that, as reported by the National Mediation Board (NMB), the company has reached an agreement with the IAM covering the company's flight attendants.
Continental's Chairman and CEO Larry Kellner personally joined the talks today, along with Robert Roach, Jr., the general vice president, transportation of the IAM.
"I want to thank the IAM leadership and its negotiating team for working together with Continental to get this deal done within the deadline set by the National Mediation Board," said Larry Kellner, Continental's chairman and chief executive officer. "Now, we must go forward and get this agreement ratified."
The IAM is preparing detailed communications to its membership explaining the agreement, which is subject to ratification by the flight attendants. The company is not releasing details of the agreement in order to allow the union to communicate directly with its members. Results of the ratification process are expected in January 2006.
Talks between Continental Airlines and the IAM resumed earlier this week at the offices of the NMB in Washington, D.C. The NMB had stated this was a final bargaining session and that failure to get this agreement could have resulted in a release from mediation.
Today's agreement between Continental Airlines and the IAM, along with previously announced pay and benefit reductions for other work groups, concludes the negotiation process with all Continental's domestic employees.
SOURCE Continental Airlines
12/08/2005
CONTACT: Corporate Communications of Continental Airlines, 1-713-324-5080, or corpcomm@coair.com
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2595 times:
Great news.......it seems as if CO has avoided a potentially difficult situation. Congrats to all concerned - the CO f/a's can have peace of mind and the CO management can focus on the business of running the airline and, hopefully, making some money.
By the way, a few analysts are predicting that CO will turn a profit during the 2007 calender year. Lets hope so.
FlyGuyClt From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 537 posts, RR: 9 Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2555 times:
I envy the CO flight attendants. They maxed out more than the NWA flight attendants and their company only wanted $82 million a year. NWA has gotten $117 million and wants a total of $195 million a year. OUCH !
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21043 posts, RR: 60 Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2513 times:
It should be zero BF seats for non pilots. Give up rows of 3 Y instead of they need to lie down, but it's silly to sacrifice a BF seat for an F/A.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2500 times:
Quoting ARGinLON (Reply 5):
I heard this as well. I believe they take 4 business class seats on a 772? Would they go down to two? Or to 6/8 in economy?
Generally, the F/As do not get a BF seat, there is a curtained off area in the Y section of the aircraft for crew rest.....we do not yet know what was agreed to, the terms of the new agreement will not be made public until the union reps disclose the deal to the F/As. The more important issues were money and pension security, the crew rest issue was secondary and my guess is that crew rest provisions will not change greatly with the new contract.
Slider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6518 posts, RR: 36 Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2476 times:
The pension thing was a real tough one, from the first round---at the root of the issue is that the group is infighting right now and there is a mixed confidence in the IAM. Many FAs voted the previous deal down strictly because the IAM would have managed their pensions.
Also, it was divided between EWR vs IAH and the system and junior VS senior. Minimum hours requirement was also a deal.
If it were just about a pay cut, I think the deal would have been done ages ago.
Now the pay part will be a bigger hit because of having had the 7 month delay in getting a deal cut.
I'm glad they reached a TA, but I'm not counting those chickens until it's ratified. Just because the IAM came to an agreement doesn't mean the membership will. Thorny indeed.
CO767FA From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 532 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2460 times:
Quoting FlyGuyClt (Reply 4): I envy the CO flight attendants. They maxed out more than the NWA flight attendants and their company only wanted $82 million a year. NWA has gotten $117 million and wants a total of $195 million a year. OUCH !
Thanks, but remember the 80's and early to mid-90's? All network carriers had much more lucrative contracts then the current CO agreement and we have yet to see the new T/A.
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6): It should be zero BF seats for non pilots. Give up rows of 3 Y instead of they need to lie down, but it's silly to sacrifice a BF seat for an F/A.
You really are unbelieveable. Go back to writing something you know about!
Luv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 11957 posts, RR: 51 Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2445 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6): It should be zero BF seats for non pilots. Give up rows of 3 Y instead of they need to lie down, but it's silly to sacrifice a BF seat for an F/A.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander as well. F/A are actually working during the flight and not sitting for the whole flight, if any one deserves it more, the F/A does if you ask me.
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 12595 posts, RR: 64 Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2428 times:
Why aren't CO's 772s equipped with the crew rest facilities that Boeing offers?
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
CO767FA From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 532 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2416 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 11): Why aren't CO's 772s equipped with the crew rest facilities that Boeing offers?
The company wanted to use after market vendors, but they didn't meet the FAA standards for safety. The company promised to install them after they were FAA approved, but then decided the cost was to great.
"The four-year tentative deal preserves the pay scale for current flight attendants, boosts the top base pay rate to $50 an hour and includes a no-furlough clause, the union said."
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 12595 posts, RR: 64 Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2380 times:
Quoting CO767FA (Reply 12): Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 11):
Why aren't CO's 772s equipped with the crew rest facilities that Boeing offers?
The company wanted to use after market vendors, but they didn't meet the FAA standards for safety. The company promised to install them after they were FAA approved, but then decided the cost was to great
I've not seen any cost estimates, but I'd have to imagine that installing proper crew rest facilities would be less expensive in the long run than using BusinessFirst or even main cabin seats that could have been used for revenue-generating customers.
Unless the weight penalty was too much, that is. I suppose that's a possibility as well.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
RAMPRAT980 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 600 posts, RR: 3 Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2359 times:
Membership still has to vote on the offer. Lets see if the ratify or blow out the contract. Choose wisely F/A's
With gun control there can be no democracy.. With gun control there can be no Freedom
Cory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6 Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2331 times:
Quoting CO767FA (Reply 17): We did with the last T/A and I'm sure we will again.
Does that mean that you're automatically not in favor of it?
Or does it mean that you're going to evaluate it to see if its fair and then vote?
JEdward From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 133 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2182 times:
Quoting CO767FA (Reply 12): The company wanted to use after market vendors, but they didn't meet the FAA standards for safety. The company promised to install them after they were FAA approved, but then decided the cost was to great.
Did you happen to see if there has been any update on crew rest in the new TA? As it seems to me, from my plush armchair, the crew rests would be a true win-win; crew gets better accommodations and CO has four more J seats for to sell.
Regardless, best of luck to you CO767FA as well as your fellow FAs
As Christ died to make men holy, let men die to make us rich. --S.C.
SJU767 From Puerto Rico, joined Feb 2004, 114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2093 times:
Well something is not right with this. In the first two dep out of SJU F/A's were all standing in the front galley and were been very rude and uncooperative with the agnts. They were just very, very picky with carry on bags, catering etc. I think Its going to be a bad week for all of us. This F/A's are typically very nice to us and very familiar with the station as the normally do this route..
ARGinLON From Vatican City, joined Jun 2005, 614 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2069 times:
Quoting JEdward (Reply 19): Did you happen to see if there has been any update on crew rest in the new TA? As it seems to me, from my plush armchair, the crew rests would be a true win-win; crew gets better accommodations and CO has four more J seats for to sell.
As you said, I believe this issue was sorted in this way. I am sure CO management wanted to get those four seats one way or the other...
Ramerinianair From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1486 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1946 times:
Luv2Fly,
Why shouldn't the Pilots get a BF seat? You said that the FA are "accually working the entire flight" - Two things - 1. The pilots aren't? They are SAFELY flying your A$$ to the destination, don't you want a well rested professional at the controls? and 2. It depends on what airline you are talking about, about half the time (if not more) CO FA are sitting on their butts in the galley.
CO should put BF seats behing the curtain instead of Y seats. The 767s and 77s no longer do domestic runs, they should change those seats now! Adding 4 BF seats instead of 9 Y seats would allow the same amount of people to rest in better seats. The seats would be close but, they would sell a hell of a lot more revenue.
SR
Luv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 11957 posts, RR: 51 Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1922 times:
Quoting Ramerinianair (Reply 22): Luv2Fly,
Why shouldn't the Pilots get a BF seat? You said that the FA are "accually working the entire flight" - Two things - 1. The pilots aren't? They are SAFELY flying your A$$ to the destination, don't you want a well rested professional at the controls? and 2. It depends on what airline you are talking about, about half the time (if not more) CO FA are sitting on their butts in the galley.
What I am saying, as you read it wrong! Both deserve a BF seat! The pilots are not running up and down the aisle serving passengers or picking up and dropping off requested items. They the FA's are actually moving around and working.
don't you want a well rested professional at the controls? Yes they are at the controls, sitting down for the whole flight. What I do not want them to do behind the controls, is fall asleep!
Slider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6518 posts, RR: 36 Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1919 times:
Quoting CO767FA (Reply 17): We did with the last T/A and I'm sure we will again.
If your concern is displeasure with the IAM, then you need to vote for this TA, then change unions.
There won't be a better deal. Period. And you're barking up the wrong tree if you think there will be.
25 EWRATC: Because the scab infested pilot ranks of continental had to vote their pay reductions into effect or they could lose their jobs. If that happened it
26 CALPilot: Just for the record, of the 5200 pilots at CO, there are only around 400 left that crossed the picket line in '83. How many SCABS are left in ATC, tha
27 CO767FA: It amazes me how my comments are instantly taken by you to mean that I will be voting "no". I will vote based on the merits of the contract and your
28 Mbm3: If you are referring to Overhead Crew Rest, then I believe you are incorrect. IIRC CO has not retrofitted any of their 777s with this feature and thu
29 ARGinLON: So what are the FAs giving to the company then? Salaries, pensions, profit sharing... all remain the same. So...what did CO get from the FAs? (I wonde
30 9844: Ya sounds like the company caved in............. lesson learned from this 21 year employee. All you mechanics and related. This MEANS THAT AIR MIC WIL
31 GLOBALDUDE: The only flights that FA's get BF seats are those that are blocked over 8 hrs AND on the 777 ( 757/767 have 3/4 coach seats) ALL 777 in CAL fleet have
32 9844: Ive only seen the FA in BF from NRT to EWR and IAH. None going through GUM HNL IAH....In fact they use the last row in the back. my two cents
33 Supa7E7: Using 2 or 3 BF seats for crew is horribly stupid. If BF is full 30% of the time, that's an average of 1 lost BF customer per flight (or so) or about
34 CO767FA: We are currently working under a contract that expired nearly 1 year ago and that was in effect for 4 years. Originally, the company and union agreed
35 RAMPRAT980: I, for one, am happy for the F/A's. Stood their ground. However topping out at 50 per hour won't sit well with other work groups. ie: If the F/A's ge
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 133 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Jun 2005, 614 posts, 
From New Caledonia, joined Oct 2001, 3096 posts, 
From Puerto Rico, joined Feb 2004, 114 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
