Issue 1 Update

July 2002

In This Issue - ATSB Approval - No Support Here - Highlights of Tentative

70

This is an update of the PHL News-Line 70 from Mollie McCarthy LECP. This newsletter is also available on the PHL page of AFA US Airways. Subscribe to News-Line 70 from here.

Dear Members of PHL Local 70, July 13, 2002

Please sign up for future PHL News Lines by submitting your Name, Payroll #, E-Mail Address and Base HERE

UPDATE As a result of the July 9, meeting with the company, our wage returns for the last two years of the TA will be 2.9 (up from 2.0).  The increases WERE to reflect the pilots only reaching 78% of their original $595 M target number.  Unfortunately, we did not receive the full credit as per the written TA, (see July 15, news-line for latest update).  We will also receive 3% on January 1 of any succeeding status quo period.

Before we get started, I need to inform you that the company wanted to speak with me before sending out the PHL News Line. I agreed and along with the majority of the MEC, met with management in DC yesterday. In the spirit of co-operation, I also let them read a draft of this news line. To paraphrase, the company said, ‘it is all inaccurate.’ I asked if that meant even my personal opinions were inaccurate? Again they said ‘It is all inaccurate.’ I respectfully disagree. To the best of my knowledge, I have written what is happening or what my opinions are at this time. However, I am willing to listen to and correct any misinformation that I am presently unaware of. 

~

Now, let’s get started with the FIRST PHL News Line.

On behalf of Terry Graf, Rod Norwood, Rachel Georges and myself, thank you for giving us the opportunity to work for you as your new representatives. 

I do not have access to the company’s CBS message board. And will make copies for all to read. All future News Lines will be sent to e-mail addresses and a copy will be put on the bulletin board for those who do not have computers. 

Please sign up for future PHL News Lines by submitting your Name, Payroll #, E-Mail Address and Base to 
http://www.afausairways.org/phl/phlemailform.html  

Thanks

With That Said, Here Are ‘MY’ Reasons For Not Supporting A 'For' Recommendation:

1. Management stated they would not announce their cuts until all labor contracts have been ratified (cuts to be retroactive). It is my opinion that our leaders should lead rather than follow. 

2. Our percentage of givebacks is only addressed in conjunction with ALPA (pilots). Our TA does not speak to management or the other labor groups (IAM, CWA, TWU). 

If, as management’s states, we will all share in this reorganization, then it is my opinion that we share equally in both the good as well as the bad. For example, if management receives an increase in wages/benefits/medical within the 6.5-year agreement then the FA’s should proportionally reap the same increases. If the company exceeds all expectations and becomes profitable sooner than expected, then the FA group should also see a faster return of their givebacks. Our TA does not address these aspects. 

3. I am opposed to giving up language that protects FA jobs. I believe the reason you will find our scope and no-furlough language in the very FIRST section of our contract is because it is the MOST important section we have/own. The TA does not address partial language or a snapback of the language. Once gone, it is my opinion we will never get it back. 

The 275 aircraft guarantee outside of bankruptcy does not speak to staffing levels, acquisition/merger, or the size and type of aircraft. While a 90-seat RJ has 2 pilots and two FA's, a 757 has the same two pilots but 4 to 6 FA's depending on staffing levels. For example if all 275 a/c were 90-seat RJ's, the company would only need approximately 3,000 FA's. However, if all 275 a/c were A-330's then the company would need approximately 15,000 FA's. Yes, this example goes from the ridiculous to the sublime but in a 6.5-year agreement no one knows what the future holds. 

Speaking of the future, what happens if there is an acquisition or merger in our future? Will the acquiring carrier's FA's have the protection we are giving up? Could the surviving carrier offer additional protections to their original employees for a smooth transition? FYI: The United Pilots received, in writing, several additional protections in the event the UAL /US merger went through. Even though we may not have concrete information about any future merger attempts at this time, this does not mean there will may NOT see one during the 6.5 years of this agreement. In our present situation, I believe we should use as much foresight as possible. 

If we are to give up this valuable language then we should, at the very least, get substantial credit towards our concessionary target number, which we did not. Our No-Furlough language protects ALL FA's not just those who are junior. This is just my opinion and you will need to decide for yourself. 

The Company has asked for our help to give them what they NEED to return our company to a healthy, profitable state. What I am opposed to is the company using this time to also get what they WANT. 

4. The increases in medical premiums are only known to 2009 and are not capped beyond that date. 

5. As a return for substantial givebacks, we received 3 UTC (Unable to Commute) days, but only in the event TWO CONSECUTIVE flights are significantly delayed or if there are two delayed/cancelled flights due to weather, mechanical or company convenience. Unfortunately, the language does not speak to the most common scenario for those who have difficulty commuting…Over Sold Flights. I believe in most cases the UTC days will be unusable. 

6. At this time, when all is said and done, it appears our wages will still be less at the end of 2008 than they would have been at the end of our present agreement in 2005.I believe you are worth your weight in gold and should be respected for your contributions. 

7. The TA has a return to present wages in the event of a 'Change of Control' (acquisition/merger etc.). If our givebacks are truly about saving our company from bankruptcy, then why is the company only agreeable to returning the wage portion? Why not give back everything? In my opinion, we have a contract that becomes amendable in 2005. We have been asked for concessions from that contract to secure an ATSB loan that will help keep our company from bankruptcy. If there is a 'Change of Control', then we no longer need to 'lend' US Airways portions of our agreement and ALL concessions should be returned to current book. Obviously, I think a little differently from management and even some of my fellow leaders. I look upon the FA concessions as 'a loan' to help our new management get this company back on it's feet. I do NOT look at these concessions as an opportunity for management to get rid of portions of our contract just because they think it is too rich. Too often, our contract has been used as an easy excuse for bad management. It was NOT the US Airways FA's who brought this company to the brink of bankruptcy. To me this is a business proposition. I am willing to 'share' in the fix, I am willing to invest in my company's survival and success, but I also want certain protections for my investment and a full return of concessions once we again become profitable. 

For these reasons I could not recommend you cast your vote for the TA. Because of our present situation, the negotiating process and the fact that I believe the NC did not need to go out in front of the pilots, I have no recommendation. This is a trying time for all of us and you must do what you feel is best for your own individual circumstance. I will do my best to give you both the good and the bad so you can make an informed vote. 

UPDATE: As a result of the July 9, meeting with the company, our wage returns for the last two years of the TA will be 2.9 (up from 2.0).  The increases WERE to reflect the pilots only reaching 78% of their original $595 M target number. Unfortunately, we did not receive the full credit as per the written TA, (see July 15, news-line for latest update).  We will also receive 3% on January 1 of any succeeding status quo period.

Some things you need to know about the TA the company and NC agreed upon:

Wages: 8.4% wage reduction (from Present day wages). 
Our present 2000 agreement has two future wage increases of 2% each. One in Nov. 2002 and the other in Nov. 2003. Those not yet realized increases have been forfeited for all year groups. Return of wages will be 2% in years 2004, 2005 & 2006. For years 2007 & 2008 the wage return will now be 2.9% per year. ALL FA’s will get their normal step increases. Wages for years 1-5 will not be reduced by the 8.4%. Because years 1-5 do not realize the initial decrease, they will also not realize the 2% return of lost wages for 2004, 2005, 2006 & 2007. On January 1, 2008, there will also be an increase for years 1-5. 
* The new amenable date of the 2000 US Airways Flight Attendant collective bargaining agreement will be extended to December 31, 2008. 
 
 
NO-FURLOUGH CLAUSE:

Section 1.E of the Agreement will be deleted subject to the following terms.

 * Guaranteed minimum fleet size: 275 outside of bankruptcy; 245 in bankruptcy. 
* Prior to implementing an involuntary furlough, the company will offer a voluntary furlough and a VISP (Voluntary Incentive Separation Package.) 
* Furloughed US Airways (involuntary only) flight attendants will be provided job opportunities at MidAtlantic Airways in seniority order and in accordance with protocols established by the parties, TBD (To Be Determined). 

Some Background Info on Our No-Furlough Clause:

Only two FA groups at major US Carriers have No-Furlough protection, Northwest and US Airways. In the early 90's the pilots agreed to change/lower the duty rigs. Due to a "Me Too" clause, the FA's were faced with the same reduction in the rigs. In return for the lowered duty rigs one of the things the pilot group received was their no-furlough language. Carol Austin, who was our MEC President at the time fought to get the same no-furlough language in our 93 agreement. The MEC President told the MEC our no-furlough clause was a deal breaker. 

Force Majeure Grievance Will Be Gone 
*When the company used the war exception in our no-furlough language as a way to furlough our FA's, we filed a 'Force Majeure' grievance. Our TA ties our grievance to the pilots. ALPA MEC has withdrawn their force majeure grievance, with prejudice, this means we will also withdraw our grievance upon Date of Signing (DOS). 

Vacation: The vacation section is in two parts.

Part one is the reduction of PAY, which will be reduced 10% from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2004. Our vacation pay rate will snap back to current book (Section 7 in our contract) on January 1, 2005.

Part two is a 10% reduction in the number of DAYS we will accrue. The language is confusing, that is because our vacation is accrued BEFORE it is taken. Because the TA starts in July, the first 6-months have a 20% accrual reduction for next years vacation days. This is the same as 10% for a 12-month period. The accrual rates will be reduced by 10% (below current book/current contract) until December 31, 2008. Please note that the ACCRUAL will snap back in 2009 but your actual vacation as it is in current book will not be realized until 2010
 
New proposed Medical/Dental plan: 
Three Different Options in a Defined Plan 
Four Tiers: Single Employee, Employee & Spouse, Employee & Children, Employee and Family. Annual Deductibles in each option. Only Option 3 has no out-of-pocket maximum (In-Network only). Yearly increases in monthly premiums. Check out the company proposal on the Bulletin board. 
Dental - 100% preventative, 80% minor, 50% major & 50% orthodontia. 

Additional Reductions: Longevity Pay, Reserve Override, Crew meals (except ITD), Per Diem, Uniform Allowance (all with Snapbacks) 

Protections and Returns: Bankruptcy protection (Section 1113 Letter and Temporary Relief Items) in case of bankruptcy, Profit Sharing. Note: There are NO guarantees in the event of a bankruptcy. A judge will decide. The company could ask for our entire contract and not get one red cent or one benefit. On the other hand they could ask for nothing (1113 letter) and we could lose more than we already have within the TA. 

"2 paid personal days" and "3 Unable to commute" Further clarification will be forthcoming once the language is finalized. 

~

A Thank You... To Luke and Laura for their years of service. To the Negotiating Committee for their time and efforts. 

A Special Thank you To Marianne Moore, MEC Legislative Chair, and her committee; Bill Pratt, Lori Vito, Alan Boswell, Emit Freshwater, Bill McGlashen and everyone FA who went to 'The Hill' to lobby Congress for the ATSB Loan. 

I would like to personally thank Carol Austin for her incredible knowledge and tireless work ethic. Carol put together an early out/retirement program, worked on scheduling issues and found money where no one else could to help save us all wages and benefits. Carol was not a negotiator and like myself was only let into a couple of NC meetings. 

Our medical is not what any of the members of the NC or the MEC wanted to bring to you. I for one am very disappointed in the company's position on the health and welfare of their valued employees. Without the relentless efforts of Teddy Xidas, LECP PIT, it would have been unbearable. I cannot think of anyone in AFA or in the company who would disagree with the statement that no one fought harder for a decent medical than Teddy did.

Well, that is all for now. Until next time,