A Quick Comparison 

The Old 2000 VSIP
To see the previous VSIP offered in our 2000 agreement click here: Side Letter L-11-1.  (http://www.afausairways.org/contract/L11.htm) As you can see, the previous VSIP was;

• Limited to 300 flight attendants. 

• At least 5 years but less than 10 years of service: 10 passes per year for 5 years.

• At least 10 years but less than 25 years of service: 10 passes a year for 10 years. 

FYI: When a US Airways FA completes 25-years of service they automatically receive lifetime passes.

The New 2002 VSIP

Even though we did not have contractual language to support what we were able to obtain in our talks with the company, I am proud to say that the VSIP now being offered, is by far the best that we have ever seen on this property. For the very FIRST time it not only includes some medical but also unlimited lifetime passes for FA's with less than 25-years of seniority. Here are the high-lights of your new VSIP;

• Limited to 723 flight attendants

• At least 5 years but less than 10 years of service: 10 space available passes a year for 10-years

• At least 10 years of service: Unlimited lifetime space available passes.

• At least 20-years of service: Unlimited lifetime passes with a boarding priority for their seniority the same as if an active or retired flight attendant.

• Medical and dental benefits for the first 120-days.

For more on the New VSIP go HERE. (http://www.afausairways.org/Furlough/vsp.html)

Early Out/Retirement

After submitting an agenda item at the last MEC meeting, the EO is finally going to be addressed. Our new MEC President has already contacted the company to get things started. 

The last EO rejected by the company during negotiations did included among other things an additional 5-years to be applied to either your age or your years of service or a combination of both. 

I know some of you have asked why isn't the company jumping at the chance to replace a high-paid senior flight attendant with one that is junior and (no offense) Lower-paid? There are extensive up front cost associated with an EO when numerous flight attendants elect to retire at the same time. The company has stated that they are not willing to take on these up front cost at this time even though future savings would be substantial. To get an EO we will need to keep it 'cost neutral' over the first couple of years. Just know that we have some great people now working on this project, I have faith that they will find a way to produce an EO that will be acceptable to both sides.

Special VS Regular Meeting

On Tuesday, September 3, 2002 we had a 'Special' MEC Meeting to fill the recently vacated positions of MEC President and MEC Vice President. 

FYI: A 'Special' Meeting may be called at any time by the MEC President or whenever 30% of the voting members (Local Presidents) petition the MEC President. The agenda of a 'Special Meeting' is specific and can only be changed with a 2/3's vote. 

The Election Process

If any candidate receives a majority of the votes (in our case that would be 4 out of the 6 LEC Presidents voting for one person) then that person is elected. However, if no one candidate receives a majority, there is then a run off between the top two candidates who received the most votes. 

The MEC Presidential Election

We had an array of qualified candidates to choose from with many familiar faces throwing their hats into the ring. 

Candidates for President who submitted their willingness to serve or resumes early included: Eric Fayard, Perry Hayes, Susan Udivari, Bill Pratt and Teri Graf (LEC VP PHL). Candidates who submitted their willingness to serve once the meeting came to order included: Lynn Lenosky, Richard Delgadillo and Chris Dzadovsky. In addition each LEC President has the opportunity to nominate one candidate from the floor. Rod Norwood, Pam Hook and Steve Hearn (LECP CLT) each received a nomination to join the list of candidates. If I have inadvertently left anyone out, I do apologize. All in all we had at least 11 candidates to choose from. 

In the first round for the election of an MEC President, no one candidate received a majority. There was then a run off election between the top two vote getters who were Steve Hearn (LECP CLT) and Perry Hayes (MEC Pres 1996-1999). 

FYI; An interview is not required for the election process. Although some who put in a 'willingness to serve' at the last minute, and who are based in PIT (location of the meeting) were given the opportunity to be interviewed, it is up to the individual LECP's to contact all known candidates before the meeting. 

In the run-off round, Perry Hayes, received 5 out of a possible 6 votes and arrived Friday (September 6) to take the seat at the head of the table. 

I did not work with Perry during his previous term as MEC President, as that was before I became active on the MEC. However, I had heard glowing reports on his intelligence and ability to lead from several Management personal, including BWI Base Manager, Susan Wall, along with several Flight Attendant representatives who did serve on the MEC while he was President. I had previously met Perry and found him both extremely intelligent and non-political. Unfortunately, I have also heard horrific rumors and want to say loud and clear that I did my homework before voting and could find nothing legitimate that would keep me from casting my vote for the man at this time. 

When Perry arrived on the morning of the third day of the regular meeting, he stepped right in without missing a beat. In my opinion he conducted absolutely the most professional and well run MEC meeting I have ever witnessed or been a part of in the last 4-years. It was refreshing to see business getting done. We actually ended on time, which I believe just may be a first. 

I do want you to know my expectations for an MEC President are exceptionally high, and if at anytime I believe that person can no longer do the job you deserve, I would not hesitate to address the situation. 

MEC VP 

There were also several very qualified candidates for MEC Vice President. As with the Presidential election, no one candidate received a majority on the first ballot so there was a run-off between the top two vote getters, Tammy Highwart and Pam Hook.

Pam Hook was elected by a majority in the run off and immediately took office the first day of the 'Regular Scheduled Meeting. Pam who is a consummate communicator has worked in the PIT Local for more than one year. She is up to date on all of the numerous scheduling issues and flight attendant concerns. Pam has proven time and again that her heart is with the flight attendants. She has the tenacity and grit to go toe to toe with management on a daily basis. I look forward to seeing her in action ;-) 

I believe scheduling will be an area we will need to focus on in the coming months and am pleased to welcome the two new officers who both excel in that field. With Leslie Miller, MEC Secretary Treasurer, rounding out the lineup, I am hopeful we have just the team we need for the times we are presently facing.

I want to thank both Perry and Pam for stepping up to the plate at the most undesirable time in our history to be in office. 

I ask that you give them the chance and support they will need to get the job done during these troubled times. 
Regular Scheduled MEC Meeting

An MEC must hold at least two 'Regular Scheduled' meetings a year. Must give at least 15-days notice and agenda items may be submitted before or during the meeting by members in writing and become part of the agenda.

There were 9 agenda items submitted by the LEC Presidents, two from PIT and 7 from PHL. There were also several immediate Action Items submitted that have already been addressed by the new MEC President. 

September 4-6 MEC Meeting Agenda Items submitted and Vote Results

Because there were a total of 9 agenda Items I will only report out on 4 for this news-line. To see the full report on ALL the agenda items please go to Agenda Items and Vote.

Agenda Item 3: (PHL)
Subject: Over Flying Of Options
Therefore Be It Resolved, that the US Airways MEC Condemns the practice of intentionally over flying one's option when not specifically allowed by the Agreement or established past practice,
Be It Further Resolved that the MEC directs the MEC VP and her designee, in conjunction with the Company, to research methods to discourage individual members from exceeding monthly flying options.
Be It Further Resolved that the MEC VP and her designee will report out, and make recommendations to the MEC on this issue at or before the October 2002 Regularly Scheduled MEC Meeting. 

Adopt as Amended
For: DCA, BOS, PHL, PIT & LGA
Against: CLT
==========

Agenda Item 4: (PHL)
Subject: Early Retirement Committee
Be It Resolved, that the US Airways MEC hereby establishes a Special Advisory Committee consisting of the MEC President and PHW Flight Attendant Carol Austin,
Be It Further Resolved, that this committee will have the authority to meet with the company to develop and "early-out" plan, and 
Be It Finally Resolved, that this committee obtain agreement of the Company that it will pay similar expenses for these discussions, as was agreed to it in the 2002 Restructuring Amendments to the May 200 Flight Attendant Agreement. 

Adopted as Written
For: DCA, PHL, LGA & PIT
Against: CLT & BOS
================

Agenda Item 5: (PHL)
Subject: Return to Previous Jump-Seat Procedures
Therefore be it Resolved, that the US Airways MEC hereby directs the MEC President, and his designee to enter into negotiations with the Company to obtain a Side Letter of Agreement resending the Jump-Seat procedure outlined in Section 30.G.3 of the Flight Attendant Agreement of May 2000 as amended August 2002, and replacing that procedure with one similar to the "30-minute Rule" that was in effect under the 1993 Flight attendant Agreement.

No Action (Agenda item goes away)
For 'no action': BOS, CLT, DCA, LGA & PIT
Against taking 'no action': PHL

FYI: Many of you have approached me asking to see the jump seat policy return to the original '30-minute' cut-off or something similar. As you can see by the vote, the other LEC Presidents did not want to discuss the issue. Their solution was to file individual grievances for any problems you may encounter. Obviously, the other LECP's are not hearing what I am. If you want to see your Jump-Seat procedures changed back, please e-mail me or better yet drop a hand written note in my mail file stating so.

Likewise if the 'New' Policy seems to be working and there is no longer a need to change the jump seat back to what it was or something similar, let me know that also. You do not need to state anything more than 'keep it the same' or' change it back'. This will let me know if I am still on the right track. 

PHL/ PHW: It is my opinion that management would have no trouble in agreeing to the change. I also believe some LECP's could be persuaded to change their minds if they heard from their membership. If the jump seat is still a problem, please write to your fellow FA's from other bases asking them to write their LEC representatives. 

=========

Agenda Item 6: (PHL)
Subject: Enhance Catcrew Screen Options 2 & 5 to contain the same info as the pilots
Therefore be it Resolved that the US Airways MEC direct the MEC President and his designee to approach the Company to discuss modifying Catcrew screens 2 & 5 so that both Pilots and FA's have access to the same actual, projected and month-to-date pay information.
Be It Further Resolved, that this request to the Company be handled in a manner consistent with the discussions, and agreement, that resulted in modifications and improvement to the agenda item adopted during the January 1999 meeting of the US Airways MEC.

Adopt as Written

FYI: Once we receive the enhancements, both you and Crew Scheduling should be able to immediately know how much 'Under fly' (http://www.afausairways.org/phl/underfly.html) you are legal to fly back without adding each individual leg. 

The Pegasus Project

This is a wonderful program that 'Assists Flight Attendants In Need'. I personally have contributed and must tell you it is a good feeling to anonymously help a fellow FA in need. For more information on the Pegasus Project, go HERE. You can also obtain information at http://www.afanet.org/pegasusproject/, you will be glad you did. 

US Airways President Dave Siegel

Mr. Siegel accepted an invitation to come and speak with the MEC. Here are a few high-lights.

• The MEC S/T, Leslie Miller and the PHL LEC President (yup that's me) gave brief arguments concerning two different issues we feel we must have for the VSIP. I am pleased to say that we did receive both. A special 'Thank You' to Mr. Siegel for stepping in and helping us reach an equitable compromise. 

• Mr. Siegel stated that he was hopeful we would not have to reduce our aircraft below the 279 mark. 

• His time with us went by too quickly as he had a flight to catch back to DC. As I was second to last to ask a question from amongst the MEC member, my time was limited but I did get a chance to mention some of the difficulties unique to PHL. He stated he would personally visit PHL to look at some of our issues. He also mentioned that other than the normal seasonal scheduling changes he did not see a reduction in PHW. 

Remember: 'United WE stand, divided WE Beg' 

FYI: We still have over 800 US Airways Flight Attendants out on Involuntary Furloughs. Please do not forget them as they are counting on all of us to help bring them back to work. 

Well, this has once again gotten a little long, so I think I will call it a night.

That’s all for tonight.