Q:     I read this on social media. Is it in fact true the Company is not allowed to limit a medical leave to one year because of a lawsuit as this states so we will get the medical leave extension even if we vote this down?  Is it true that the current 1-year medical leave would be changed to four years regardless of whether this TA passes or not. There was a huge lawsuit in California and I believe a couple other states against the airlines who had one year medical leave policies they lost. Is it true that the company legally cannot make a medical leave one year?

A:     No. There is no law that AFA is aware of that eliminates a medical leave in duration of one year.  However, the case that we believe you reference had to do with ADA compliance and the fact that American Airlines would not allow any employees on medical leave to return to work until they were free from any restrictions. The court ruled this practice violates the ADA.  Reasonable accommodations are allowed under ADA, so eliminating the possibility of some reasonable accommodation to allow an employee to return is a violation of ADA. It has nothing to do with the duration of the leave.

Q:     Is L-VX now under AFA? Are we one union? If so, how is it possible that L-VX is not brought up to current L-AS pay standards immediately? Are we not all Flight Attendants?  We all do the same job, just on different planes. If we are now viewed as one company by the FAA, L-VX FAs should be treated as so. If the pay issue was managed and we were all on the same level,  the conversation would be very different.  This has become “us” vs. “them.” Why is Afa not putting their foot down and making sure L-VX is at the L-AS pay scale immediately?  How can the union represent both if we are not even? Wouldn’t that be a conflict of interest?

A:     There is a legal answer to the question and a non-legal answer to the question.

Legal answer: There is nothing compelling management to bring the L-VX Flight Attendants up to the L-AS pay and work  rule standards.  AFA advocated for that as soon as AFA represented the L-VX Flight Attendants in April 2017.  Management did not agree to do so, but AFA did secure an interim pay raise and other improvements for L-VX–just not up to the L-AS rates or work rules.

Non-legal answer: In a public employee meeting, Alaska CEO Brad Tilden, answered a similar question by admitting that management did not bring the L-VX Flight Attendants up to the full Alaska rates in order to maintain pressure on AFA in merger negotiations. That is the real reason.  

AFA represents both the L-VX and L-AS Flight Attendants. AFA fought for the L-VX Flight Attendants to enjoy the L-AS pay and work rules from the very moment we represented the group in April 2017. Although management agreed to interim pay rates back then, it held out agreeing to closing the remaining gap in wages as leverage to reach an agreement on the merger. AFA can and has put its proverbial foot down, but mutual agreement with management is required in order to achieve improvements to wages and work rules.

Q:     Some VX ITLs (steps 1-5) will be receiving pay cuts with this TA. Can you please explain this?

A:     When evaluating pay step increases it is very important to compare apples-to-apples. Every step, including current ITL’s and those affected by the Red Circle LOA will receive a pay increase (and retroactive 1/1/2018). When a Flight Attendant works in the A position, they receive $2.26 / block-hour ($2.00 / TFP) A pay “override” in addition to their regular (base) step rate of pay. When a Flight Attendant does not work in the A position, s/he does not receive the A pay override. This is a similar application as at L-VX: a ITL has her/his ITL rate reduced by 13% when not working in the ITL position, which equals the appropriate ITM rate.

Management has made it clear that they wish to eliminate the ITL program as quickly as possible. In order to align VX and AS as much as possible until Full Integration, and to work within IT constraints, the A Position bid (formally ITL program) will be open to all Flight Attendants on a monthly basis. In addition, all open time will be available on the 12th of the month to all Flight Attendants within the base to allow schedule modifications.

Example 1: A Year 3 ITL is currently making $31.35 / block-hr for ITL under the VX pay scale. At DOR (+2 bid periods, s/he will make $33.56 / block-hr if s/he works in the A position ($31.30 / block-hr base rate + $2.26 A pay = $33.56 / block-hr).

Example 2: A Year 3 ITM is currently making $27.26 / block hr under the VX pay scale. At DOR, s/he will make $31.30 / block-hr when s/he does not work A position.

In summary, the JNC believes that no ITL is taking a pay cut when comparing the pay rate for working the appropriate position (ITL vs A and ITM vs “not A”).

Q:     If Alaska management doesn’t meet the Mar 2, 2019, goal and must apply L-AS rules on L-VX, who won’t have the coverage to comply what happens? Cancelled flights? Altered schedules? Operational assignments? Shouldn’t these kinds of penalties be more one sided and less disruptive?

A:     Flight Attendants have voiced concerns that management will either willfully delay Full Integration or because the IT systems will not be capable of integrating at the time. However, if the TA is ratified and if management does not meet the target goal of March 2019 to combine the Flight Attendant Groups, then management must build the pairings on the L-VX partition under the same duty-time limitations and rest provisions as the L-AS Flight Attendants.  While this is a “penalty” for the Company in terms of productivity, it is a great protection for the L-VX Flight Attendants.

Management will have ample warning and time to prepare for this deadline, and they will take measures to avoid disruption in the network.  However, it will be inefficient for the Company and an inconvenience that may involve moving around flying.  Again, this provision was put into place as an incentive for management to meet the deadline and as a long-term protection for the L-VX Flight Attendants.

Q:     Why can’t the GST transfer be grandfathered in? Seems like forcing AS rules on VX retroactively is unfair. I don’t think GSTs would have transferred in knowing their pay would be frozen for years. Can you please explain?

A:     Management initially took the position that all rates should be re-set to Flight Attendant Occupational Seniority. However, the VX Red Circle Pay Rates Letter of Agreement provides for L-VX Flight Attendants  whose Company Seniority is greater than their Occupational Seniority to remain at their current pay step. Other Alaska Airlines employees who transfer into Inflight as a FA do not receive pay rates based their Company Seniority. Additionally, Horizon Air (QX) FAs “transfers” do not receive credit for time served as a QX FA to establish their pay step.  

AFA proposed full Air Group Seniority for pay purposes, but management would not agree due to cost. The red-circled rates was the best we could achieve given the totality of circumstances.