• OPEN LETTER TO VP OF INFLIGHT
• Accessing The Hub
• AFA Local Numbers

Dear Members,

AN OPEN LETTER TO VP OF INFLIGHT SHERRI SHAMBLIN

Since the merger process began management has been making periodic appearances at the PHX and CLT Training Centers to answer questions and report on the state of the airline. As I have said in previous Elines that initiative is certainly within their right and I believe most employees welcome the face to face interaction with management.

As most of you know the forum for these meeting usually begins with an opening statement by the manager(s) presiding over the meeting followed by a question and answer period.

The meetings are videotaped and can be viewed on the hub at: http://thehub.usairways.com/news/crewnews/november/112806_clt_FA/clt_fa_video_112806.htm

The following is an open letter to Vice President of Inflight, Sherri Shamblin, regarding comments she made at the November 28, 2006 meeting held with Flight Attendants at the CLT Training Center.

Thank you,

Mike Flores, President
US Airways MEC
AFA-CWA

--------------

VIA FAX AND US MAIL

Ms. Sherri Shamblin
Vice President of InFlight Services
4000 E. Sky Harbor Drive
Phoenix, AZ 85034


Dear Ms. Shamblin,

On November 28, 2006, US Airways President Scott Kirby, and you presided over a meeting at the CLT Training Center. After reviewing the meeting video on the hub I am compelled to write this letter in order to express my dissatisfaction with some of the answers and comments you provided that day.

You were asked to comment on the following statement by a PHL based Flight Attendant:

"Ms. Shamblin, it is my understanding the Union and the Company agreed to the 'cost neutral' position of the Company with regard to merging the two contracts, and now that Delta is involved the Company has said they will go to the best of best of the Contracts.

You responded, "No, the position is still the same-'cost neutral'. It is still business as usual. Doug has stated that if we merge with Delta, the Company is willing to go to the higher pay rates."

In response to that statement, I must make again make you aware the Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) and the Master Executive Council have NEVER agreed to the Company position the merged contract would be "cost neutral." In fact, during one of your infrequent visits to the negotiating table you were told the following by me: "the current US Airways East contract will not ratify as is, and this merger will not be subsidized by the Flight Attendants, East or West." While "business as usual" may be the Company goal, you know the Union has never agreed to that concept. The fact you let the questioner believe the Union was in concert with the Company position was a complete misrepresentation of what you know to be our position. Or maybe you don't know, as you also stated during the CLT meeting "you are at the negotiating table two weeks a month". You made that statement to fortify the Company position that the Company is not "dragging its' feet in negotiations". The fact is, you have not been at the negotiating table with any consistency. During the nine months of negotiations the committees have met many times, including the first two weeks of this month without your being present.

The JNC has repeatedly told the Company committee there will be no single agreement that does not contain improvements for both the East and West memberships. These improvements will be commensurate with the financial position of the Company, our competition and the revenue environment we operate within. The current US Airways contract is the result of three concessionary agreements during two bankruptcies. We all sacrificed in order to put the Company in position to survive and merge. The America West Agreement, ratified in 1999, is the byproduct of a ten year struggle for representation and a several year fight to obtain an agreement through the collective bargaining process. Prior to the merger, the America West Flight Attendants were in Section 6 negotiations with the Company. Those negotiations were recessed by a Federal Mediator and the America West Flight Attendants were then forced into single agreement negotiations.

The ongoing single agreement negotiations began earlier this year under the Company premise of "cost neutral". From the outset the Company negotiators told the JNC, the East and West contracts were "very similar" in terms of cost. Earlier this month the Company position changed and the JNC was informed the East had the higher cost contract. Furthermore, the Company stated they would be willing to go to the higher cost contract, but would not allow any" cherry picking". Taken literally that would imply, and in fact you have stated, that if, for example, the America West Flight Attendants wanted the higher pay rates of the East contract they would have to give something up-such as vacation. In addition the Company position that a single agreement based on the highest cost contract would therefore mean, by definition, zero improvements for the East Flight Attendants. I can assure you an agreement under those terms would be dead on arrival to both the East MEC and the East membership

Since the Delta Air Lines merger/takeover announcement the Company's new rhetoric is management is willing to incorporate the "highest common denominator" of the two existing contracts and the Delta pay rates and work rules. As Mr. Kirby, said the Company would do that, but would not "cherry pick". While a full analysis of the Delta Flight Attendant pay rates and work rules has not been completed, a preliminary study shows the Delta Flight Attendant pay rates are marginally higher in some pay steps and lower in others when compared to the East Contract. The study also indicates the Delta Flight Attendant work rules regarding sick, hours of service, vacation and scheduling are not as positive as those contained in the East or West contracts. Delta Air Lines is, at this time, in bankruptcy. That fact alone means some or all of Delta Flight Attendant pay rates or work rules can be reduced by Delta management simply sending out a memo.

During his November 28 meeting with the pilots and Flight Attendants, Mr. Kirby explained the Company has done a poor job at conveying what they really meant when they talked about "cost neutral" contracts. I think you and Mr. Kirby have done a masterful job of confusing and misleading the memberships in an effort to say the exact same thing- someone will have to give something up because the overall cost of the higher contract will have to be absorbed by one group or the other.

When asked about moving forward with the current negotiations you stated that, "the Company wants to reach an agreement". Nearly nine months into the process we have only reached Tentative Agreements on five contract Sections. We have spent an inordinate amount of time haggling over relatively non-cost items that have resulted in many open issues. It hardly seems to the JNC, the Company is interested in closing this deal before moving on to the Delta Air Lines merger/takeover.

The Union believes management is not willing to make meaningful changes in a single agreement that will adequately address the needs of our members. To management, I say this- quit wasting the negotiating committee's time. Unlike previous negotiations played out on an uneven playing field, it is no longer "business as usual" at this negotiating table. The Union strongly believes in this motto - "deal or no deal". No deal-no operational merger.

You were also asked the following question regarding Reserve issues:

Ms. Shamblin, is the Company doing anything to help out the poor Reserves? They are taking an overabundance of burden and are losing it.

In your response you stated:

The "Reserve issue is a sticky issue, and it revolves around your contract, that was voted in".

While it is true the 2002 Restructuring Agreement replacing the Seniority Reserve System with the Least Time Order System was ratified, and the 2004 Agreement that contained the Electronic Trade Board (ETB) was ratified, the entire system was turned upside down in September 2006 by the FAA. The FAA interpretation, requiring Reserve days on call to be included for purposes of the 24/7 FAR, basically rendered the ETB moot for a great many Reserves and Lineholders. To simply state that it is the contract that dictates the system and thus causes the problems is extremely shortsighted.

The Union quickly realized the consequences of the FAA interpretation and met with Company to find ways to mitigate its' effect. The Union presented the Company with over a dozen proposals to offset the problem, and allow Reserves to earn a living in the interim, while a new Reserve system was negotiated during the merged contract talks.

While the Company did agree to create more Secondary Lines and increase the number of Voluntary Personal Leaves, all of the Union's other proposals were rejected out of hand either because of cost or computer programming issues. The result of the FAA interpretation and the Company's unwillingness to negotiate an alternative is we now have a Reserve population who is no longer able to earn a living based on a contract that is no longer viable. Other Company cost savings conceded to in the 2004 agreement have increased as a direct result of the FAA interpretation-not further bargaining. The windfall for the Company created by the FAA interpretation should be used to adopt, in a mutually agreed to manner, some of the Union's proposals to benefit our members.

The net result of all of this is that we have a Reserve system and a Reserve group at the breaking point. The Union has tried to reach an agreeable solution but have been told by Company management that, "it is not our (the Company's) fault this has happened to you".

This is more than a "sticky issue" and your response to the Reserve Flight Attendant group is inadequate, insulting and overly simplistic.

You were also asked the following question regarding the proposed Delta merger/takeover and the fact that Delta is currently non-unionized:

What happens to the Delta Air Lines Flight Attendants since they are not represented by a Union?

Your response was:

Since the Delta Air Lines Flight Attendants are not represented by a Union, then the National Mediation Board (NMB) would decide whether there will be a representational election. You further went on to say that since there are more Flight Attendants at Delta there may have to be a representational election for all Flight Attendants".

Ms, Shamblin, if you want to hold a Union meeting feel free to call me and I will be glad to include you as part of the Agenda. In the meantime you have no business forecasting what you may think (or hope) will happen with respect to representation for the AFA members at America West and Us Airways and the Delta Air Lines Flight Attendants. AFA has waged a long campaign to represent the Flight Attendants at Delta Air Lines and both the management of Delta and US Airways are well aware of that fact. There are many scenarios that could play out should the proposed merger/takeover of Delta Air Lines occur.

Delta Air Lines has yet to release their Plan of Reorganization to the bankruptcy court and that will certainly have a bearing on the process as that plan may call for the downsizing of Delta Air Lines. Your comments that the right to representation is not up to the Company, while technically correct, do not reflect the fact Company does have influence, by working with AFA, in what the NMB may require in order for the representational rights of the current AFA members at US Airways and America West to continue as well as extending those rights to the Flight Attendants at Delta Air Lines.

The Association of Flight Attendants will not support a merger with Delta Air Lines if it in any way jeopardizes our representation or our contract. That is the only fact you need concern yourself with at this time. Respectfully Ms. Shamblin, you have no business telling our members what will have to happen in the event of a merger as quite frankly you have no way of knowing at this time what may or may not be required

I wish management would use the time at further meetings to confine their comments to those that adequately address the concerns of our members with regard to our product, catering, aircraft configurations, customer service and marketing issues.

Single agreement negotiations and Union representational issues will be dealt with at the proper venues and not at the CLT or PHX Training Centers.

Sincerely,

Mike

Mike Flores, President
US Airways MEC
AFA-CWA
 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

AFA US Airways website

http://www.afausairways.org/

Accessing The Hub:

http://thehub.usairways.com 
Questions about the Hub? Please contact the EDS Help Desk at 336-744-6000 for assistance. More information can also be found HERE.

AFA Local Numbers

Council 40 PIT 724-695-3329
Council 41 DCA 703-212-8090
Council 69 BOS 781-289-8454
Council 70 PHL 215-492-0840
Council 82 LGA 315-736-3483
Council 89 CLT 704-527-0325

New Hotline Number Toll Free: 866-USA-AFA2
US AIRWAYS Benefits Information 800-872-4780

Reply to Inflight: askinflight@usairways.com

The *E-Line* is now in a new and improved format. By updating your profile at unionvoice.org you will be able to enjoy improved services in the near future! Visit your subscription management page at: http://www.unionvoice.org/

Got questions about This *E-Line* from AFA - US Airways or any other Union matter? Do NOT REPLY to the *E-Line*. PLEASE contact your local AFA officers or committee chairs directly