Q:     Why couldn’t VX just come in under our contract? Since we acquired them, did that mean the contract had to be opened for negotiations, therefore giving AFA a chance to improve our contract? Were the negotiations basically to make improvements on our existing contract while we had the this opportunity, or was it more of a full blown contract negotiations, and how long were the company and AFA in negotiations?

A:     There really is no specific roadmap for merger negotiations. Management wanted to negotiate only transition items that would bring the L-VX FAs over to the L-AS CBA.  Management maintained that the AS CBA was closed and because AFA Alaska does not the same language as the pilots, there would be no improvements negotiated for the L-AS FAs. The JNC pushed back and strongly advocated for pay raises and other improvements for the L-AS FAs, which also accrue to L-VX FAs.

The parties entered merger negotiations in June 2017 and reached a TA in February 2018.

Q:     Why were certain provisions negotiated and not others?

A:     The final TA does not indicate the scope of all provisions that the JNC proposed. We brought forward several items that management rejected. For example, we especially pushed on retiree medical insurance, improving the 480 provisions and securing pay improvements targeted towards senior FAs (in addition to the general pay raises for all FAs).  However, management was adamantly opposed to agreeing to these proposals.

Q:     Who decided on what provisions to seek improvements on and which ones to not even try to address right now?

A:     The JNC went to the bargaining table with a limited number of issues based on membership feedback from the merger negotiations survey and in consultation with the MEC. It was a different approach than regular Section 6 negotiations in which the entire CBA is potentially open.

Q:     I read the Medical Insurance Premiums post on the JNC Blog, but could you elaborate a bit more? I understand that contractually AS must offer us a comparable plan/coverage  to the pilots although my concern is not the coverage itself as much as the other items such as deductibles and the amount the Company has contributed to the HSA. Is there any protection or cap on the deductibles they can offer with a plan?  Could the Company retract the money they have contributed to the HSA in the past?

A:     The deductibles, out-of-pocket maximums, co-insurance, life-time caps, even prescription costs are all detailed in the pilots’ CBA.  The Company must offer the same plans and provisions to the Flight Attendant group.  The HSA company contributions (currently $1,000 employee only and $2,000 for family) are not contractual for ALPA.  In years when management was attempting to increase participation in the high-deductible PPO plan, the contributions were increased.  

Important note:  The Alaska PPO plans are self-insured, so changing plan administrators can not bring significant change.  

The Premera plans (Regular PPO and Consumer Choice PPO) are self-insured by Alaska Airlines and Premera is the administrative services provider.  Negotiated plan terms cannot be unilaterally altered by the Company so the health plan provider doesn’t matter as long as the health plan provider can accommodate the services needed to comply with the contract.   The Company has changed service providers before (e.g. from Aetna to Premera) and the labor group leaders were invited to participate in the process before a decision was made.

Q:     Can we see the plan that the pilots have to research if our current providers, services, etc/, are in the plan?

A:     AFA has verified with the ALPA Alaska Benefits representative that the pilots have the exact same network coverage as the FAs. Here is the relevant contractual language for your reference:

ALPA CBA Section 27 Health Insurance >

ALPA Alaska’s contract is amendable April 2020.

Q1:     Why is the agreement so long? Why not make it a year to get the processes in place and then revisit it later? With the cost of living going up in almost every base city, why chain us to an agreement until 2021?

Q2:     What are the benefits to AFA/flight attendants in extending our contract?  What is the benefit to the company?  Who asked for the extension? AFA? Company? Or mutual?

A:     The JNC did not go into merger negotiations with the intent of negotiating a mid-term JCBA. We went in focused on securing sensible and fair transition provisions for the L-VX FAs and tangible improvements for the L-AS FAs. However, management was adamant that there would be no improvements for the L-AS FAs without a mid-term JCBA.

A mid-term JCBA was not necessarily a negative development in itself. If the term of our current CBA had remained unchanged (amendable 2019, early re-opener 2018), AFA would be back in negotiations in October 2018 (of this year!), and the L-VX FAs would not yet even be on the L-AS work rules. From a bargaining leverage standpoint, that is a difficult position to be in for AFA. Consequently, the JNC pushed for an amendable date of 2020 (early re-opener 2019), but management was unwilling to agree. In fact, management initially proposed an amendable date of 2022 (early opener 2021), and the parties ultimately agreed to an amendable date of 2021 (early re-opener 2020).

Due to other recent Flight Attendant contracts, L-AS pay rates had fallen behind, so the JNC negotiated the 4.5% increase (coupled with the 1.5% in place for December) to bring back up the pay rate rankings compared to industry. In fact, we have closed the gap between Alaska and #1 Southwest to a better position on a percentage basis for top of scale rates than we were in 2014 (9.2% to WN now vs. 9.3% to WN in 2014).

Section 6 negotiations can take years, which can translate into longer periods of time without pay raises. The JNC saw an opportunity to secure pay and other improvements now, which sets us up for an improved bargaining position once we have all been flying together as a unified group. The early re-opener negotiations would begin in October 2020.

Q:     In the TA the 1/12 requirement of paid time is eliminated.  What are the implications of that for an FA that does not achieve the hard time 480 in a year?  What are the implications of not having paid time in a month for those who do fly above the 480 hard time?

A:     The current CBA requires that a FA’s vacation accrual is reduced by 1/12th for every month in which s/he does not have paid time in that month.  This is addition to the 480 requirement. The JCBA would completely eliminate the 1/12th reduction for each month in which a FA has no paid activity.

If a FA achieves more than 240 but less than 480 TFP in a year and s/he also has 2 months in that year with no paid activity, then s/he will receive half vacation credit unpaid. Under the current CBA s/he would receive a 1/6th reduction to her/his half vacation credit (unpaid).

Under the JCBA, a FA would receive full paid vacation credit if  a FA achieves the “hard 480” but also has unpaid time in several months.

Q:     According to the TA we no longer have to have paid time in a month to accrue 1/12 vacation credit for the next year. As a full time flyer I have never had a single month without paid time so I have no idea what happens with regards to medical insurance payments and union dues, etc. Would we just receive a bill for those months and how many months in a row could this go on? You technically aren’t taking a leave since you bid but but not having any earnings to deduct these items is something I am not familiar with.

A:     Medical insurance payments would be double deducted in the following month. If you do not have enough paid time to cover the double deduction, then COBRA Management Services will send you a bill for COBRA. At that point you would have to do coordinate with the Employee Benefits Department to manage coverage and payments. (Your AFA LEC officers are available to help navigate that quagmire.) Union does, however, do not auto-deduct. You will be sent a bill by AFA after that first month if you do not arrange payment directly.

Q:     Why are the furlough protections only for one year?

A:     The furlough protections actually will remain in place for over a year and a half (April, 2018 – December 2019).  This will carry the Flight Attendant group through Full Integration.  The JNC advocated for a longer period of time for this protection, but management was unwilling to extend the protection past December 2019.

Q:     If the date of the furlough protections ends in 2019 does that mean they can furlough after that for the remainder of the extension?

A:     The term of the furlough protection is separate from the duration of the mid-term JCBA.  Today, management can furlough at any time, but must use the protective provisions in Section 18 Reduction in Force of the current CBA.  The same would be true for a JCBA, except that management would be prohibited from furloughing Flight Attendants during the period of the furlough protection (through December, 2019).

Q:     I was asked by about 7 different people in the current initial class, “Should I be looking at going to Delta?” by trainees who were offered positions at both. The furlough protection clause is making them think that furlough is being talked about.  Many on their training flights were told “I don’t why we are hiring you, we are so over staffed,” so that made them go into panic mode!

A:     The Supplemental Reduction in Force Protection LOA for the JCBA was negotiated as a temporary measure to cover the period of Full Integration, and is a not uncommon provision in a merger situation. The design of the furlough protection is to allay fears that, due to the combining of the Flight Attendant workforce, the Company may find itself significantly over-staffed and furlough Flight Attendants while re-allocating network flying.  It was in no way intended to signal management’s desire or intent to furlough.

Often in an airline merger situations there exists a staffing imbalance (i.e. overstaffing on one side and understaffing on the other) when the partition separating two work groups is still in force.  It is important to remember that once all Flight Attendants are flying on the JCBA work rules, it will require more total Flight Attendants than today to complete the current flight schedule. The 10.5 hour duty day and the increased rest provisions among other things will translate into significantly changed pairings on the L-VX side, which will require a larger workforce in total.

AFA  is proud of the work- life balance we have achieved at Alaska Airlines over more than 70 years of bargaining history.  We believe Alaska Airlines is a great place to work and would not advocate choosing a non-union carrier over the contractual protections at Alaska Airlines. That said, the choice of a career path is a personal one for each individual and there are many criteria to consider.