How high are they allowed to go?

You know that's going to be one of the approaches Delta mgmt will take to argue against a union: "Their contract only allows a max pickup of ___ hours; can you live on that?"

I live north of the shoe line myself, but I see you're an A330 guy, so it answers my question. I understand why you don't understand why I think it's a "different animal". It's a little hard to explain, but I'll take a shot at it. With one disclaimer: there are many DAL F/A's that are all about gaining the right to representation. As for the others...

First, there is the Atlanta effect. That's just as hard to explain as anything else, especially without sounding a little.. condescending. Imagine that all Delta F/A's are equal, but some way more equal than others, and so imagine a system that's based on making two groups feel most equal of all: Atlanta F/A's in general, and senior mamas everywhere. Add to this a natural cultural propensity to be anti-union, and layer it with a system of stick-and-carrot dispensed through supervisors that... well words fail me to quite explain the supervisors. Suffice it to say the system is designed to reward certain behaviors, the same way handcuffs and a riding crop encourage certain behaviors, by pretending pain is pleasure, and vice-versa. It's like that here, but it's not the "fun on Saturday-night" kind of amateur perversion. It's a more degrading, institutionalized kind of thing.

So let's talk "senior mamas". They've been punished during the bankruptcy, with a bunch of new scheduling prcatices designed to weaken their position, and encourage them to retire. The most ambitious ones, those we should keep, did leave. Of those who stayed, many cannot possibly find a place of employment that could stand their attitude for even the briefest period of time. They're stuck here, they have to feed Fussy, Sassy, and Mister Socks, and their only hope is to get some scraps heaped upon them. Unilaterally. Because their enthousiasm, their drive, their youth are all far behind them, and they are starved only for a little of Delta's attention. They don't actually know the word "strike", and they are as incapable of self-determination as soviet babouchkas were of stepping out of line to simply get their loaf of bread with dignity. They wait.

Duty calls. I'll try to continue later.

So what you're saying is there needs to be a mandatory F/A retirement age.

Any suggestions?

I said that?

I won't judge why they do it, or if they really need to fly that much. The fact is, though, that they do, and they will not vote for a union, if that union eventually makes them reduce their hours to a more reasonable level. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I know of no union that condones or contractually allows that level of flying.[/quote]

Consider yourself corrected. You ARE wrong. Some fNWA F/A's can and do fly that much too. Which means of course, that you are spreading rumors.

Like I said, I tell them that these little day lines to the West Coast and back will be long gone. No more sleeping in their bed every night and only working eight to nine days a month.

They looked shocked. I simply tell them that the wealth is spread around when it come to scheduling practices of a union group. I also tell them that they would definitely see four day trips domestically. They just scoff at that idea.

IMHO a union and how the schedules would change would in fact drive many senior momma's out of this business as they could not stand it. Heck you should hear some of the junior ones that get "A" days. (junior as in hired after 1984. That is the most senior FA that gets reserve days)

No, not spreading rumors. I guess that I'm working with outdated information. I'm surprised that their union has no cap on flying (or is it just a very high cap?).

By your post, I gather that you are, or are married to, a flight attendant that hopes to be/ remain unionized. Do the fNWA flt attendants have any contractual cap on hours per month? I'm just curious. I have no dog in this hunt. I really don't care if the F/As unionize or not.

DALFA, from an outsider's point of view it appears that AFA had the second worst performance of any union during the NWA bankruptcy (only AMFA produced worse results for their membership, and that started pre-bankruptcy). AFA was successful in getting their contract rejected, and then assuring that all of labor was prevented from striking after a contract rejection by losing in the Appeals court, which decimated everybodies leverage. They wound up with scraps relative to what their pre-rejection terms could have been when they finally signed an agreement just prior to bankruptcy exit. There has been continuous turnover in their leadership ranks. To an outsider, they appear incredibly ineffective, especially when compared to other unions going through the same bankruptcy.

I respect the rights of the Delta Flight Attendants to unionize. It's my view that in the long term it's probably in their best interests (if they become unified, which ultimately management will provide). But I don't get the support for AFA. Can you explain by showing concrete results they've achieved for the NWA FA group relative to the other unions?

Part II
 

Iceman,

...then there is the part about how their relationship with us is being (very effectively) managed. It's very, very effective divide-and-conquer stuff. I'll leave it at that.

So you're looking at a fairly strong anti-union culture in some qurters, and simple apathy in others. Here is an example... I was under the impression that DOH would not be favorable to the South F/A's. I thought the AFA was chosing the wrong time to try to get a union vote, and risked alienating the Delta F/A's (turned out to be true, since the vote failed). So, a few months ago, before the vote, I ask one of them her position on integration, the timing of it, and AFA merger policy vs. McCaskill... She says: "Oh, I don't really know. I don't follow that stuff. I'm so junior, I don't get any trips I want anyway".

Imagine relying on her for a strike vote, much less a picket line.

But the ultimate example of the Delta difference has to be the current integration efforts. Look at ours: everyone had an opinion, both sides prepared, we argued our case. It was settled by a third party. What process did the F/A's get? Well, Management convened some sort of "council", and this council decided what the F/A's "wanted". For all I know, they based this on reading chicken entrails, or simply sat in smake-filled backrooms, drinking Bourbon. Most likely, they decided the F/A's liked what Mike Campbell likes, and Mike likes what Richard likes: labor peace. Regardless, at the end of the day, Delta decided for the F/A's, that the AFA position was fair. So, what was the fallout? Outrage? Riots? No: we got crickets. Everyone continued their job. Everyone looked up where they "will fit", and noone budged.

I'm not saying that the ultimate outcome of arbitration, or a suit, wouldn't have been DOH for F/A's anyway. But I am saying it's absolutely amazing that everyone thought it was absolutely kosher that the company would represent their interests, and decide on their behalf. That is is not the sign of a group that will get much at the negotiating table later, in my mind.

So, while there are many people that make up the F/A ranks, and many who think like us, or DALFA, there are also many (and I mean many) in their opaque world that seem to me to be unwilling or incapable of fighting for their own rights, being steeped in a tradition and a culture of getting more by courting the favors of the company, and serving at the company's whims. By riding our coattails, (to great effect), and by the mere threat of a union vote, they've enjoyed a better life. It's going to take a huge effort to convert them into a lean, mean, striking machine. I don't know if it will ever happen, and I doubt they will be very successful even if they make the transition.

Which is why I see guarded positions from most pilots on this topic. I have seen one AFA sticker on a pilot bag, and I have found zero pilot to advocate for AFA so far. You may conclude that we're foolish weaklings, or you may conclude we've been looking at this two-legged horse long enough to know it's not going to win the Derby. I'm sorry for DALFA that it is so, but you will see it after SOC, and particularly when flying with senior F/A's, or Atlanta F/A's: this is indeed a different animal.

I understand why any self-respecting pilot that isn't fully familiar with this particular culture would want to (naturally) support unionization efforts for their F/A colleagues. And so, I was supportive of such votes in my eraly years at Delta. Now, it is my assessment that the combined group would either a) fail to vote for a union, or b) narrowly vote one in, and get completely bogged down in disunity.

I hope this helps explain my earlier opinion.

Good post...thanks