It is interesting to note with the exception of Alaska (which had its first contact mirror SWA[TWU]), none of the flight attendant pay held out as superior to Delta's was from an AFA represented carrier.

If you look at current three largest afa carriers, UAL, NWA, and LCC, you will find a pay advantage for Delta.

The straight hour example above also did not include performance bonuses and profit sharing.

If you google "flight attendant" and "industry contract comparison" or "flight attendant compensation chart," you will find multiple sources that support argument that the afa is not delivering industry leading contracts. The IAM. APFA, an MIT group and Delta management have all published these comparisons.

IMHO, based on the available data and its track record,the afa will not be able to deliver all that it is promising us.

 

I agree same reason

 

Do you really want to take a look at the whole picture?


Lets have a look...

Average flight attendant expense per Capita(2007) this is the latest information available.

Southwest - $79,100
American - $73,700
Continental -$73,100
Northwest - $63,500
United - $63,300
Delta - $60,200
JetBlue - $60,000
UsAirways - $53,300


This includes the total compensation package ingluding wages, benefits, retirement etc...


Sure, the base pay at Delta might be a little higher then at United or Northwest. But lets take a look at some of the benefits those carriers have.

Delta health insurance - $67 per month, $1000 deductible($500 credit from DL) and the RX coverage literally stinks!

Northwest health insurance - $91 per month, $350 deductible, much better RX coverage.

United health insurance - multiple plans including a free option, Kaiser Permanente HMO, no deductible only small co-pays, no monthly premium



Go down to duty rigs...


Delta domestic max duty day = 16
United/Northwest = 14-15

Minimum rest after a 16 hour duty day?

Delta = 8:15 from release to report

United/Northwest = At least 10.


Minimum credit per duty period?

Delta = 4:45 average

Duty period 1 = 6:30
Duty period 2 = 6:30
Duty period 3 = 2:00

Total = 15 hours

Northwest = 4:15 minimum per duty period

Duty period 1 = 6:30
Duty period 2 = 6:30
Duty period 3 = 2:00(4:15 because of credit)

Total = 17:15


Which would you rather make?

Delta = $43 per hour

Northwest = $40 per hour


Also, the above example isn't 1 in a million either...its actually quite common!



Back to your comment about AFa negotiated contracts...


United and UsAirways contracts are concessionary contracts. Agreed to by the membership when the company was hurting. United is in its initial stateg of contract negotiations, and UsAirways wont be able to get a new contract until 2011 or until the pilots get a new contract. Why? There are alot of me too clauses in the UsAir contract and the NMB has aligned itself with management instead of making UsAir management come to the table!

The Northwest contract was negotiated by AFA in 10 days! It was either that or thousands of flight attendant jobs being outsourced to lower paid foreign nationals. Oh btw...those same guys that wanted to do that then are now at Delta! Shhh....dont tell anyone abou it!


The Alaska contract is actually a good indication of what AFA can negotiate at a healthy airline, as that was the last contract negotiated at an airline not in Ch.11 or on the brink of it!

Most of the improvements that Delta F/A's enjoy today are from last year, put in place right before the last union vote. Just by AFA threatening to be on the premises gets you this much...imagin how much you can get by it actually being your bargaining agent!


All this crap about management will take care of you is really old. Perhaps those who still believe this should go in for an update!

 

i think f/a are mean...

 

Many have indicated they would not wear a pin or support the f/a specifically but would you tag your bag with something like 'Union Yes'?

 

No, I don't think my union has been working for me.

The question that hasn't yet been answered is, why do the DAL FAs want the same union that NWA FAs have, but yet, I think it is clear that DAL FAs have it better. I don't think the NWA FAs have gotten their money's worth.

 

You all want to know why you have to deal with the grouchy old hags on the plane????

Delta retiree insurance = $581 per month
Northwest retiree insurance = $181 per month

Delta has a SS offset
Northwest does not

Why should the "new" Delta group want scope???

Look...

Airline unions take note of Northwest's outsourcing - Oct. 26, 2005

USATODAY.com - Northwest wants to hire non-U.S. flight attendants for international flights


I hear you guys b**ch about scope all day, and you have that right! How about those of us in the back get some job protection????

 

It's important not to confuse the 2 issues at hand with the flight attendants, 1. Union representation and 2. the negotiating organization. With little exception pilot unions in the US are few while among the flight attendants there are more options.

So back to my initial question without regard to a specific organization, would you put a sticker on a flight bag stating 'Union Yes"?

 

I don't think so. If you were correct, the opposite of that argument would be true. But it isn't, that's why the FAs at NWA are old hags too.

Having old FAs has more to do with political correctness (FAA not mandating certain physical standards) and the FAs not putting their money where they should and living within their means.

My father, a person who has made less than 35K a year, has a very good retirement and owns his own home. He was smart with his money and didn't waste it. In fact, when I was in high school, I was teased because my friends thought we were "rich".

I'm all for people having job protection and a decent salary. I just happen to think that DAL FAs already have that. And I think the union that you want to get in bed with, as already shown with its experience with NWA and what they have, is going to be good for the FAs or for Delta.

 

Please show me where we have scope?

I deat with the same management as you, if I should go ahead and trust management...why don't you guys just get rid of your scope language and trust management just like you want us to.

We have a bunch of fellows running the show that grew up with Lorenzo. I don't trust our management team and I want it in writing. Whats so bad about that?

You seem to think its a good thing, the dispatchers seem to think ist a good thing, and management seems to think its ok for them to have a contract.

But why not us?

We're at the bottom of the barrell in compensation, have the worst work rules in the country (most F.A.R. minimums) and now we have a bunch of people running the show that tried to outsource F/A jobs just a couple of years ago.

Wouldn't it be stupid to NOT want it in writing?