Flight Attendants' Union Approves Strike

Associated Press
Update 4: Flight Attendants' Union Approves Strike
11.16.2004, 04:04 PM

The board of the country's largest flight attendants union authorized a
national strike Tuesday after its president accused the airline industry of
using the bankruptcy process to cut workers' pay and eliminate other
benefits.

Airlines such as UAL Corp.'s United and US Airways Group Inc. are using the
bankruptcy process to cancel union contracts and impose deep pay cuts that
are threatening flight attendants' careers, said Patricia Friend, president
of the Association of Flight Attendants.

She also noted that the bankruptcy process is being used to terminate
pension plans and eliminate health coverage for retirees.

"Our entire industry is in turmoil and the careers of our flight attendants
all hang in the balance," Friend said Tuesday in Pittsburgh. "Almost
everywhere we look, flight attendants are being forced to work longer hours
with reduced rest time, and all for ever-decreasing wages. This must stop."

The union, which represents 46,000 members employed by 26 airlines, said it
will immediately start the process of taking strike votes at four airlines -
United, US Airways, ATA Holdings Inc.'s ATA Airlines and Hawaiian Holdings
Inc.'s Hawaiian Airlines - and will tally the votes by the end of December.

From there, the union will wait until there is an action in bankruptcy
court.

US Airways, for instance, on Friday asked a bankruptcy judge to cancel the
collective bargaining agreement for flight attendants and several other
unions. The airline then wants to impose a 15 percent pay cut on the flight
attendants, with no pay raise until 2008, and eliminate their pension plan.

The judge has scheduled a hearing on the motion for the beginning of
December and has 30 days to make a decision.

If the judge cancels the collective bargaining agreement, then US Airways
attendants will be on strike and "will be supported by their sister and
brother flight attendants within the AFA," Friend said.

It was unclear Tuesday how many flight attendents - and from what airlines -
would strike if US Airways attendants were to strike.

The union would probably use "our trademark chaos strike tactic, which
involves intermittent strikes without notice as to flight, time, day,
airport," union spokesman David Kameras said.

US Airways spokesman David A. Castelveter said the airline continues to
negotiate.

"We understand the union's frustration with what has happened to the legacy
airlines and the impact it has had on flight attendant careers," Castelveter
said. "A strike, however, by law is not permitted under these circumstances.
It would ground this airline and send approximately 5,400 flight attendants
to the unemployment lines."

If the judge rejects the company's bid to cancel the current contract, the
union and the airline will continue to negotiate, but Friend said the
airline could refile the motion at any time.

"We're hoping that they'll withdraw that motion before we even have a
hearing so we can continue to bargain toward a satisfactory conclusion,"
Friend said.

Friend announced the board's strike authorization vote at a news conference
in a Pittsburgh hotel. Her comments were met by cheers and chants from
dozens of flight attendants.

The national Railway Labor Act, which requires intervention of a federal
mediator and a "cooling off period" if good-faith negotiations reach an
impasse, has been replaced by the bankruptcy code, Friend said.

"When a bankruptcy judge abrogates a collective bargaining agreement in the
court, that judge says to the parties the contract no longer exists, to the
company, you're free to employ your self help, which is to implement the
terms and conditions of your choosing," Friend said. "We intend to exercise
our right to self help, which is to withdraw our services."

US Airways says it needs pay cuts to avoid liquidation and transform itself
into a low-fare carrier like JetBlue Airways Corp. and America West Holdings
Corp.

The judge presiding over US Airways' bankruptcy has already imposed
temporary pay cuts of 21 percent on the flight attendants and some other
union workers, comparing the airline's situation to "a ticking fiscal time
bomb."

United is seeking another round of pay and benefit cuts from its union
workers, including $140 million in annual concessions from the flight
attendants on top of $314 million it has already secured, the union said.

At Delta Air Lines Inc., which is in danger of bankruptcy, flight attendants
are not unionized.
--
"Garbage day is a very dangerous day!"

Goliath & Wildwing's Storage Room
http://anatidae.homestead.com/

james_anatidae wrote:
Update 4: Flight Attendants' Union Approves Strike

As well as Communications Workers Union of US Air (controls ground customer
service personel and reservation agents) have been given an 86% vote from
members for a strike mandate.

Seems that the bankrupt airlines keep wanting to renegotiate agreements they
have just finished negotiating. I can understand personel not being happy
about constantly being told they must accpt more and more cuts. They should
have been told from day 1 of bankrupcy that they's get salary/beneefits parity
with empooyees of Southwest and be done with it.

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees will be
asked to pay to work.

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.

james_anatidae wrote:
Update 4: Flight Attendants' Union Approves Strike

As well as Communications Workers Union of US Air (controls ground customer
service personel and reservation agents) have been given an 86% vote from
members for a strike mandate.

Seems that the bankrupt airlines keep wanting to renegotiate agreements they
have just finished negotiating. I can understand personel not being happy
about constantly being told they must accpt more and more cuts. They should
have been told from day 1 of bankrupcy that they's get salary/beneefits parity
with empooyees of Southwest and be done with it.

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees will be
asked to pay to work.

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.

nobody wrote:

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees will be
asked to pay to work.



Hi! (-;

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.



Given the precarious state of the major US carriers, that flight
attendants would
literally be striking themselves out of a job.

gld

nobody wrote:

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees will be
asked to pay to work.



Hi! (-;

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.



Given the precarious state of the major US carriers, that flight
attendants would
literally be striking themselves out of a job.

gld

Gary L. Dare wrote:

nobody wrote:

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees
will be
asked to pay to work.



Hi! (-;

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is
pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.



Given the precarious state of the major US carriers, that flight
attendants would
literally be striking themselves out of a job.

gld



Probably. I suspect that they have finally been pushed to the point
that they feel if they cannot have a decent job then management can not
have a cushy spot as well. And if they must bleed then the stockholders
and bond holders will bleed as well.

Gary L. Dare wrote:

nobody wrote:

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees
will be
asked to pay to work.



Hi! (-;

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is
pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.



Given the precarious state of the major US carriers, that flight
attendants would
literally be striking themselves out of a job.

gld



Probably. I suspect that they have finally been pushed to the point
that they feel if they cannot have a decent job then management can not
have a cushy spot as well. And if they must bleed then the stockholders
and bond holders will bleed as well.

"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...
Gary L. Dare wrote:
nobody wrote:

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees
will be
asked to pay to work.

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is
pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.

Given the precarious state of the major US carriers, that flight
attendants would
literally be striking themselves out of a job.

Probably. I suspect that they have finally been pushed to the point
that they feel if they cannot have a decent job then management can not
have a cushy spot as well. And if they must bleed then the stockholders
and bond holders will bleed as well.

That actually makes some sense. It seems like the CEOs never pay when a
company gets into trouble, even in the airlines case, where a big chunk of
the problem is them clinging to an obsolete method of flying.

"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...
Gary L. Dare wrote:
nobody wrote:

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees
will be
asked to pay to work.

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is
pretty silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.

Given the precarious state of the major US carriers, that flight
attendants would
literally be striking themselves out of a job.

Probably. I suspect that they have finally been pushed to the point
that they feel if they cannot have a decent job then management can not
have a cushy spot as well. And if they must bleed then the stockholders
and bond holders will bleed as well.

That actually makes some sense. It seems like the CEOs never pay when a
company gets into trouble, even in the airlines case, where a big chunk of
the problem is them clinging to an obsolete method of flying.

Worse than a "medium term loss of customers," JF. It means a long term loss
of jobs. In 1982, the Machinists Union wouldn't agree to cuts at Braniff -
they were afraid other airlines would also insist on give backs. Braniff
died. In 1991, the same union, the IAM, wouldn't agree to cuts at Eastern -
they hated Lorenzo (which may well have been deserved, but...) - Eastern
Died. Ditto Pan Am and the Teamsters.

Bottom line - do the flight attendants (and other airline employees) want
jobs at 75% of what they used to get, or do they want to be unemployed, and
receive nothing.

Jeff

"nobody" wrote in message
...
james_anatidae wrote:
Update 4: Flight Attendants' Union Approves Strike

As well as Communications Workers Union of US Air (controls ground
customer
service personel and reservation agents) have been given an 86% vote from
members for a strike mandate.

Seems that the bankrupt airlines keep wanting to renegotiate agreements
they
have just finished negotiating. I can understand personel not being happy
about constantly being told they must accpt more and more cuts. They
should
have been told from day 1 of bankrupcy that they's get salary/beneefits
parity
with empooyees of Southwest and be done with it.

As someone else said recently, it won't be long that United employees will
be
asked to pay to work.

However, to strike during a time where an airline is bankrupt is pretty
silly
because that will result in medium term loss of customers.