AFA Alaska + Hawaiian

Representing the Flight Attendants of Alaska + Hawaiian

Click here to report an issue to AFA
You are here: Home / Archives for Committees

Before It Becomes a Grievance: Understanding ADR and SRB

Grievance Committee

  • When AFA and management disagree on a contractual issue, it doesn’t necessarily become a grievance right away.  Most times, there is an intermediate step taken to try to resolve the issue.
  • Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) brings together decision makers from AFA leadership, inflight management, and labor relations management to try to work the issue out.  Scheduling Review Board (SRB) is a similar process that involves AFA Representatives and Crew Scheduling management.  
  • If everyone can’t agree on a resolution, our AFA Grievance Committee can still file a formal grievance and address the issue through the contractual grievance process.

As we know, our collective bargaining agreement provides many protections related to our working conditions, pay, and benefits.  Our AFA Grievance Committee and other AFA Representatives work constantly to ensure that management is doing right by our Flight Attendants according to the language in the contract.  Sometimes, however, disagreements arise between AFA and management about how a particular provision in the contract should be applied or whether or not a contractual violation occurred in the first place.

Our contract provides an established process for handling disagreements such as these.  Section 19 [Grievance Procedures] and section 20 [Board of Adjustment] of our CBA, often referred to collectively as the contractual grievance process, outline the procedures for how disputes about contractual language and interpretation are handled.  But before a matter is referred to the grievance process, there is often an intermediate step taken to try to work the issue out with management.

Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process is intended to give AFA Representatives and management the opportunity to resolve issues more quickly and with more flexibility while saving on the expenses related to processing a grievance.  ADR meetings are held every two weeks and include the AFA MEC Grievance Committee and management counterparts in Inflight management and the Labor Relations department.  During these meetings, the group reviews each case and attempts to work through issues that would otherwise be forced to the grievance process directly.

Scheduling Review Board (SRB)

Alongside ADR is a parallel process that specifically addresses scheduling-related issues.  The Scheduling Review Board (SRB) meets once per month and includes representatives from our AFA MEC Grievance, Scheduling, and Reserve Committees along with Crew Scheduling management.  The goal of SRB is the same—work to resolve issues more quickly than the grievance process would allow while achieving the best possible outcome for Flight Attendants.

How Do I Know If My Issue Has Been Referred to ADR/SRB?

If you’ve reported a concern to AFA and the issue has been referred to ADR or SRB, the status of your ticket on the AFA Alaska Online Support Center will show as “escalated to ADR” or “escalated to SRB” accordingly.  The AFA Representative assigned to your case will continue to be your point of contact and provide you with updates following ADR/SRB meetings.  Our MEC Grievance Committee also maintains a log of current and past ADR items that can be viewed on the Grievance Committee page of the AFA Alaska website (click the “view the ADR log” button under the ADR process heading).   

What If We Can’t Work it Out?

While an issue is being addressed through ADR or SRB, the time limitations outlined in the contract for when a grievance must be filed are placed on hold.  This ensures that the Flight Attendant and our contractual rights are protected as we try to resolve the issue.  If we aren’t able to reach an agreement with management that is acceptable to everyone involved, our AFA Grievance Committee maintains the right to address the issue by filing a formal grievance.

Questions?

If you have questions about the ADR process, don’t hesitate to contact your Local Grievance Committee Chairperson.  For any questions about the SRB process, contact your Local Scheduling Committee Chairperson or Local Reserve Committee Chairperson.

Uniform Committee Meeting Recap – 1st Quarter 2022

Uniform Committee

  • Our AFA Uniform Committee Chairpersons met on Tuesday, February 1 to discuss their ongoing program of work to represent Flight Attendants interests related to uniforms.
  • The Committee also met with management to receive updates and discuss issues and problems that Flight Attendants are reporting related to uniform quality, wearability, and availability.
  • If you are experiencing any issues with uniform quality or construction, please report the issues to Unisync as soon as possible.  Please include your Local Uniform Committee Chairperson on the email so they can help track any issues or trends that might be developing.   

On Tuesday, February 1, our AFA Local Uniform Committee Chairpersons met to discuss their ongoing work to represent our Flight Attendants and push for improvements in our workplace.  Representing you at the meeting were Kim Mazzolini (ANC), Dena Heath (SEA), David Jelinek (PDX), Lisa Mueller (SFO), Heather Milner (LAX), and Denise Sheldon (SAN).  Also present were MEC Uniform Committee Chairperson Todd Scarlett; MEC Air Safety, Health, & Security Committee (ASHSC) Uniform Safety Representative Deb Wallstrom; and MEC Vice President Brian Palmer.  The committee met with Director of Fuel* Lauren Kriegler, Marketing Product Delivery Manager Kelly Cuthill, and PDX Base Manager Kristie Stafford from management. 

* Within the company’s supply chain management division, fuel and uniforms are managed by the same group of people. 

Topics of Discussion

The committee reviewed a number of items both during internal AFA-only conversation and when meeting with management.  Some items discussed include:

  • Results from the recent wear test of a prototype warm weather/Aloha shirt that was conducted by the Uniform Committee and ASHSC.
  • Concerns that management does not involve the Uniform Committee early enough in the process of developing new uniform components and policies, resulting in unnecessary time and/or expense when problems are identified by Flight Attendants after initial development is in progress or complete.
  • Proposal by AFA to expand the ability to wear boots in order to improve Flight Attendant health and safety.
  • Status of backordered uniform items and projected availability.
  • Ongoing uniform quality issues, specifically about recent reports of zippers breaking off.
  • Concerns about sweaters in the female uniform collection being perceived as too thin and not providing enough warmth.
  • Requests for pockets in maternity uniform pieces.
  • Requests for improvements to the transition jacket, specifically increased warmth and wind resistance.
  • Concerns regarding inconsistent enforcement of uniform policies and standards by management. 
  • Continued requests to simplify uniform policies and guidelines to improve clarity and make compliance easier for Flight Attendants.
  • Status of AFA request for non-binary/gender non-conforming uniform and appearance standards.
  • Possible expansion of crew luggage program to include a spinner-type suitcase.

What The Committee Is Working On

  1. Improving the Uniform Boot Policy. Working with management and the AFA Air Safety, Health, & Security Committee (ASHSC) to allow for a broader range of Arctic boots, to allow Arctic boots in Alaska any time there is snow or ice on the ground, and to allow boots outside of terminals and the aircraft anytime there is inclement weather (policy not yet in effect).
  2. Simplification of Uniform Policies.  Advocating for an overall simplification of company uniform policies through clearer guidelines, removal of excessive or unrealistic restrictions, and other common sense changes.
  3. Uniform Wear Testing.  Participating in wear testing of new or modified uniform pieces under consideration by management, including providing in-depth feedback and promoting changes that make pieces easier to wear and care for.  

We Want to Hear From You!

Please help our Uniform Committee by taking the time to email Unisync at alaskaservice@unisyncgroup.com with any quality issues you are experiencing.  When sending an email, please describe the issue with as much detail as possible and include photos if you can.  Please CC your Local Uniform Committee Chairperson on the email so that the Uniform Committee can track the issues as well.

Do you have other feedback for the committee or items that you’d like brought up with management?  Please let us know!  Your Local Uniform Committee is your voice to management.  You can find our contact information on the Uniform Committee page of the AFA Alaska website. 

Scheduling Committee Meeting Recap – January 2022

Scheduling Committee

  • Our AFA Scheduling Committee Chairpersons met on Tuesday, January 25 to discuss their ongoing program of work to represent Flight Attendants interests related to lineholder scheduling.
  • The Committee also met with management to receive updates and discuss issues and problems that Flight Attendants are experiencing with scheduling, pairings, and bidding.
  • Your Local Scheduling Committee is available to answer questions, provide clarification, or help to resolve any lineholder scheduling-related issues.  Please don’t hesitate to reach out!

On Tuesday, January 25, our AFA Scheduling Committee Chairpersons met to discuss their ongoing work to represent our Flight Attendants and push for improvements in our workplace.  Representing you at the meeting were Heather Reier (ANC), Rita Tillou (SEA), Melodie Anderes (PDX), Virginia Fritz (SFO), Brie Donoghue (LAX), and Kitty Cohen (SAN).  Also present were MEC Scheduling Committee Chairperson Jake Jones, MEC Scheduling Committee Vice Chairperson—Pairing Construction Karen Ferrell, and MEC Scheduling Committee Vice Chairperson—PBS Adam Clarey.  The committee met with Director of Inflight Crew Scheduling Denia Pisia, Manager of Crew Planning Mac Patterson, and other management representatives from Crew Scheduling and Crew Planning. 

Topics of Discussion

The committee reviewed a number of items both during internal AFA-only conversation and when meeting with management.  Some items discussed include:

  • Snow Operations – Precancellation, reassignments, diversions, stranded and hotel/transportation concerns reported by Flight Attendants through the AFA Alaska Online Support Center.
  • Regional aircraft flying within the State of Alaska and the lower 48. How it affects our bases and block hours. 
  • Filing Activity Claim Forms within Rainmaker to assist Flight Attendants with pay related questions.   Scheduling representatives do not have access to individual Flight Attendant Rainmaker profiles and need to request screenshots when assisting with pay.  
  • Contactability requirements of Section 8.Q. Reviewed when Flight Attendants are required to be contactable and return calls to scheduling.  Also being available for ground time while on duty. 
  • El Paso flying locked in SEA base March through May 2022. 
  • Sick Leave and staffing, if sick leave is reduced could potentially add more line holders and reduce the overall reserve staffing system wide. 
  • Flight Attendants with ground time on more than 4 hours need to request day rooms.  Scheduling will wait to book the room until the Flight Attendant makes contact.  
  • Pyramiding Pay – premium, holiday, over duty, winter incentive

What The Committee Is Working On

  1. Information Technology Improvements.  Including, but not limited to, Block2Block/Inflight Mobile, Flight Attendant website performance, JCTE performance, Open Time statistics and trade processing times, JCTE releases, and Crew Scheduling/Crew Admin items (non-JCTE).
  2. Reassignment Flow Chart.  Developing an easy-to-follow flow chart to help explain how reassignments work, similar to the pre-cancellation flow chart. 
  3. Scheduling Quality of Life Improvements.  Reviewing ways to improve Trip Length Distribution (TLD) and other quality of life options.  Working with management to develop a quality of life survey to determine Flight Attendant scheduling priorities. 
  4. Sunset of NAVBLUE ClassBid PBS.  Conducting PBS base sits to help support Flight Attendants in preparation for the cutover.

We Want to Hear From You!

Do you have feedback for the committee, concerns you’d like to share, or items that you’d like brought up with management?  Please let us know!  Your Local Scheduling Committee is your voice to management.  You can open a support request on the AFA Alaska Online Support Center or contact us directly using the information on the Scheduling Committee page of the AFA Alaska website.

Air Safety, Health, & Security Committee Meeting Recap – 1st Quarter 2022

Air Safety, Health, & Security Committee (ASHSC)

  • Our AFA Air Safety, Health, & Security Committee (ASHSC) Chairpersons met on Thursday, January 13 to discuss their ongoing program of work to represent Flight Attendants interests related to safety, health, and security in our workplace.
  • The Committee also met with management to receive updates and discuss issues and problems that Flight Attendants are facing onboard the aircraft.
  • Reporting safety concerns is more important than ever given the challenges we are currently facing as a work group.  Flight Attendant Irregularity Reports (FAIR), Aviation Safety Action Reports (ASAP), and fatigue reports can all be filed through Report It!  Please contact a member of your Local ASHSC if you need assistance.

On Thursday, January 13, our AFA Local Air Safety, Health, & Security Committee (ASHSC) Chairpersons met to discuss their ongoing work to represent our Flight Attendants and push for improvements in our workplace.  Representing you at the meeting were Debi Wallstrom (ANC), David Lake (SEA), Blair Kimball (PDX), Brad Young (SFO), Felicia Porter (LAX), and Eva Gatus (SAN).  Also present were MEC ASHSC Chairperson Seth Heiple, MEC ASHSC Vice Chairperson—Air Quality Yvette Satterlee, and MEC Vice President Brian Palmer.  The committee met with Director of Inflight Strategy & Support Gloria Chow, Cabin Safety Manager Cari Smith-Allen, Manager of Inflight Policy & Procedure Joevanni Camacho, and Inflight Experience Program Manager Matthew Coder from management.

Topics of Discussion

The committee reviewed a number of items both during internal AFA-only conversation and when meeting with management.  Some items discussed include:

  • Request for increased sanitization of galley areas between flights.
  • Concerns with MedLink clearing passengers who appear to be ill.
  • Concerns about the perceived lack of sufficient signage in airports regarding mask requirements.
  • Overall inadequate communication of mask requirements to passengers.
  • Concerns about perceived inadequate lighting outside of new ANC RT facility.
  • Concerns about connectivity with change in cell service provider for IMDs.
  • Ensuring we have adequate procedures when we do not have the ability to use B2B due to lack of connectivity.
  • Requested update to soft blocks on A321 to better protect the B F/A and reminder to CSAs to honor soft seat blocks when possible.
  • Request for brighter cabin lighting during compliance checks.
  • Ongoing lack of adequate trash stowage space.
  • Double vs. single chamber life vest and how to properly demo.
  • Airbus assist handle.
  • Making COVID testing more readily available.
  • “New” boarding positions and challenges with safety and compliance.
  • Closing the loop on disruptive passenger and yellow card events by taking company and FAA response and reporting it back to submitter.
  • Trend of catering provisioning the entire aircraft from the aft galley only.
  • Looking for improvements to the Report It! App.
  • Request to add “in an emergency leave everything” to safety demo announcement.
  • Need for better guidance in the FAM about when passenger tattoos and clothing should be considered inappropriate and how to handle.
  • Requests for improvements to onboard medical equipment, including adding a pulse oximeter, adding a glucometer, and improving sizing of the blood pressure cuff.
  • Request for management to provide additional clarification on policies related to lifting and stowing passenger carry-on bags.

What The Committee Is Working On

  1. Time in Motion Studies. Working with management and the AFA Inflight Service Committee to assess how long it takes to perform each F/A duty. For example, performing preflight checks or doing a full beverage service on a A320. It is our hope that this information will support changes like providing time for preflight checks prior to boarding and ensuring inflight service is not scheduled unless it can be consistently and safely accomplished on legs like SFO-PSP or ANC-BET.
  2. Improving the Uniform Boot Policy. Working with management and the AFA Uniform Committee to allow for a broader range of Arctic boots, to allow Arctic boots in Alaska any time there is snow or ice on the ground, and to allow boots outside of terminals and the aircraft anytime there is inclement weather (policy not yet in effect).
  3. COVID-19 Mitigations. The ASHSC stays up to date on the pandemic by reviewing CDC guidance, TSA orders, FAA recommendations etc.; working with the ASHSD (Air Safety Health & Security Department) at AFA International; and coordinating with AFA ASHSC’s at other airlines. This information is used to continually advocate for appropriate COVID-19 mitigations in our work environment.

We Want to Hear From You!

If you’ve experienced a safety-related issue, please help the committee to advocate for improvement and change by filing a report.  Flight Attendant Irregularity Reports (FAIR), Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) reports, and fatigue reports can all be submitted using ReportIt!  If you’re not sure what type of report to file for a particular situation or need help, please don’t hesitate to contact a member of your Local ASHSC.

Do you have other feedback for the committee or items that you’d like brought up with management?  Please let us know!  Your Local ASHSC is your voice to management.  You can find our contact information on the ASHSC page of the AFA Alaska website. 

Grievance Committee Update – 3rd and 4th Quarters 2021

Grievance Committee

  • Our Grievance Committee works to protect all Flight Attendants from arbitrary and unjust disciplinary action and to uphold our collective bargaining agreement.  This update provides a short summary of the committee’s work over the past two quarters.
  • Management has issued discipline lately for a variety of reasons.  Read on for more information about the reasons why management is disciplining and terminating Flight Attendants.
  • If you’ve faced a situation that you believe might be a contractual violation, please report the issue through the AFA Alaska Online Support Center.  AFA Representatives review each report submitted and will follow up to help you determine options and a course of action. 

Our Grievance Committee has been very hard at work ensuring disciplinary due process and contractual compliance on your behalf.  The contract requires a minimum of 13 arbitration dates yearly to dispute discipline/termination cases and contractual issues.  Termination cases are usually given first priority in order to return a Flight Attendant back to work as soon as possible; however, we seek a balance between discipline and contractual cases.  AFA and management mutually decide which cases to arbitrate next based on many factors. 

Steps of discipline are confirmation of oral warning (COW), written warning (WW), suspension (varied number of days) to termination.  COWs, WWs, and suspensions remain in a Flight Attendant’s file for 18 months, and then are removed.  If a Flight Attendant is in a step of discipline and gets another violation, the new violation will build on the previous violation.  Management doesn’t always progressively travel up the steps of discipline.  If management investigates a Flight Attendant for theft or abuse of sick leave, for example, management will terminate the Flight Attendant if there is evidence to support its findings; if there is no evidence, then the Flight Attendant will most likely be issued a record of discussion (ROD). A ROD is not considered discipline.  There is no middle ground for certain violations.  

Subject of Most Recent Discipline

  • Theft.  Removing anything from the aircraft other than an opened/used bottle of water, unused pilot crew meal or purchased food removed will result in termination.  
  • Sick leave and FMLA abuse.  Terminations are on the rise due to travel audits among other things.  Anything written in the comments/remarks on posted trip trades and personal drops can be seen, even if eventually deleted.  If management determines abuse it results in termination.  
  • Timecard fraud.  Examples: Intentionally delaying boarding door closure to obtain sit pay.  Management has terminated for this violation.
  • Reserve “Roulette”.  Not being within two hours of base for your Reserve Availability Period (RAP) and calling in sick only once given an assignment.  The Company considers this a terminable violation.  Management regularly reviews the trip trade postings and history related to sick calls.  Even deleted trade history or postings can be seen by management.
  • Lying in an investigation
  • Drug/Alcohol violations
  • Harassment
  • Reserves commuting during Reserve Availability Period (RAP) even if self-assigned a trip and/or not being in base for the entirety of reserve period.  Management has terminated for this reason several times.  Management regularly reviews commuting history and whether a FA is in base for her/his RAP period.  If not, they will terminate on a first offense.
  • Social media violations including sending friend or follow requests to passengers on social media based on information gained from Block2Block.
  • Commuter Violations
    • Flight Attendant released from DHD and used D8Y home
    • Flight Attendant used D8Y when they picked up out of base
    • Flight Attendant used D8Y to/from incorrect cities
    • Flight Attendant used D8Y for pleasure travel.  Commuter audits are being used for researching whether commuting
  • Lost IMD or other required items
  • Failing to complete CBT—even if FA just forgets to hit the close out x at the top to switch it from in process to complete.
  • Uniform Issues—Flight Attendants can and have been pulled from working their flights without pay for uniform non-compliance.

Recent Arbitration/Mediation

May 2021Disciplinary Grievance
June 2021Disciplinary Grievance
July 2021Disciplinary Grievance
August 2021Disciplinary Grievance
September 2021Disciplinary Grievance
October 2021Contractual Grievance
November 2021Contractual Grievance
December 2021Disciplinary Grievance

Recent Contractual Arbitration Awards

None

Recent Grievance Settlements

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-64-17 Violation of §27.P.1.f-h Company Business Flight Pay Loss.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §27.P.1.f-h [General-Association: Company Business Flight Pay Loss (CB)/Company Meetings], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it requested Flight Attendants attend an Inflight Announcement Focus Group on or about August 7, 2017, without compensating for company meeting pay nor the five percent (5%) override and “A” pay, and without regard to contractual duty day applications; alternatively it provided non-negotiated compensation.   

Details:  

  1. On or about August 7, 2017, approximately 24-30 Flight Attendants attended a Flight Attendant announcement focus group.  The above-referenced grievance was filed on their behalf.   The names of the Flight Attendants are not currently known. The Company will exercise all avenues to identify them  If they become known at any time, each of those Flight Attendants will be paid 4 TFP for their attendance at a work event.  
  2. On a go forward basis, the Company will follow the best practice of alerting AFA prior to publicizing work and/or volunteer opportunities to the Flight Attendants.  The Company will inform AFA whether the Company will compensate Flight Attendants who attend the event, or if the event is intended as a volunteer opportunity only.  If the parties disagree, AFA may file a grievance based on that event.   

Grievances Recently Mediated 

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-56-17-Violation of §15.C.4 Medical Leave of Absence.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §15.C.4 [Leaves of Absence: Medical Leave of Absence], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when in December 2016 it denied [a Flight Attendant’s] medical leave of absence (MLOA) because she did not also qualify for FMLA and because the MLOA was less than 10 days in duration.  

Details:

  1. When a Flight Attendant applies for a medical leave, the Company will process all such leaves according to the same criteria, regardless of the requested length of such leave. 
  2. FMLA will be granted if all applicable requirements are met. If the leave qualifies for FMLA, FMLA and contractual medical leave will run concurrently to the extent required by law. 
  3. If the Flight Attendant otherwise meets the requirements for having a serious health condition but the condition is not expected to meet the minimum number of days of incapacity as required by the FMLA definition of continuing treatment in 29 CFR § 825.115(a), the Company will grant a contractual medical leave. 
  4. If the Flight Attendant has a serious health condition as defined by the FMLA or by Paragraph 3 but does not qualify for FMLA for any other reason (e.g., the Flight Attendant has exhausted their FMLA; the Flight Attendant does not have enough qualifying hours for FMLA, etc.), the Flight Attendant will be granted a contractual medical leave. 
  5. If Matrix (or successor leave administrator) denies a contractual medical leave because the Flight Attendant does not supply adequate medical information to determine if the Flight Attendant has a serious health condition, the Company will review the request for a medical leave under Section 15.C.1 of the collective-bargaining agreement (“CBA”) and either grant the leave or exercise its rights under Section 17 of the CBA. 

Grievances Recently Granted by Management 

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-1-17- Violation of §32.C.5. Assessing Short Sick Call Points to Flight Attendant on FMLA.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §32.C.5 [Attendance Policy: Short Sick Call], past practice, all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Federal Law when it assessed short sick call points (2½) to Flight Attendants on qualified Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) status when they called in sick within two hours of scheduled check-in. 

Details:  As June 15, 2021, I am amending the prior grievance response on behalf of the Company. The prior grievance response dated March 10, 2017, is still accurate with respect to the Company’s position as of today, except for one small caveat. The caveat is as follows – if a Flight Attendant makes it known to the Company at the time of the short sick call that unusual circumstances related to their FMLA qualifying medical condition occurred such that they couldn’t have reasonably complied with the normal two-hour notice requirement for their sick call, the company will evaluate that information. If Employee Medical Relations determines that the unusual circumstances are consistent with the Flight Attendant’s FMLA qualifying medical condition, the Company will reduce the point value of the short sick call to zero. This is consistent with 29 C.F.R. 302(d) which requires employees on FMLA to “comply with an employer’s usual and customary notice and procedural requirements for requesting leave, absent unusual circumstances.” This small portion of grievance 36-99-2-1-17 is now sustained; however, the rest of grievance 36-99-2-1-17 is still denied for the original reasons dated March 10, 2017. 

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-201-20-Violation of §10.Q & §11.E.4.d Violation of Reserve Assignment List Order.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §10.Q [Scheduling: Low-Bid Option] and §11.E.4.d [Reserve: Order of Assignment, Assignment of Open Sequences/Assignments], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when its Jeppesen Crew Access (JCA) scheduling system places low-bid option and no-bid lineholder Flight Attendants who pick up reserve days and opt out of the Reserve Assignment List (LTFA) at the top of the list rather than listing them in inverse seniority order following all other Reserves within the same classification (AM/PM/ER) and with the same number of days of availability.

Details:  As of today’s, date [June 18, 2021], I am amending the prior grievance response on behalf of the Company and sustaining the violation of §11.E.4.d [Violation of Reserve Assignment List Order]. The parties continue to work the issue through a mutually agreeable manual workaround that has been implemented and the “Known Crew Access Issues” document. 

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-41-20-Violation of §30.A.2 Training Hours Over Eight Hours.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §30.A.2 [Training: Hours], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about January 24 and 25, 2020, it required at least three Flight Attendants to attend Recurrent Training (RT) in Long Beach (LGB) in excess of eight hours.  

Details: One TFP for two Flight Attendants who released after 4pm.

Grievances Recently Withdrawn

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-320-20-Violation of §30.C.4 Computer Based Training (CBT).  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §30.C.4 [Training: Training Pay/Computer Based Training (CBT)], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about September 28, 2020, it added a 5th Computer Based Training for Flight Attendants to complete for 2020.  Prior to adding the 5thCBT, it issued Quarter 1 CBT, training videos CBT, Quarter 2 CBT and Quarter 3 CBT.  

Grievances Recently Filed and Awaiting Management Response

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-1-22-Violation of §8.D Check-In and Release.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §8.D [Hours of Service:  Check-In and Release], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when its Block to Block (B2B) check-in system doesn’t allow a Flight Attendant to check-in if they have an unacknowledged trip change requiring them to report as originally scheduled.

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-3-22-Violation of §10.S Pre-Cancellations.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §10.S [Scheduling: Pre-Cancellations], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about December 26, 2021,  it did not accept or process Flight Attendant calls in a timely manner thereby usurping the Flight Attendants’ ability to utilize the contractual pre-cancellation language allowing them to receive and decline an alternate assignment; and it allowed the Company to reassign Flight Attendants. 

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-4-22-Violation of §8.D Check-In and Release.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §8.D [Hours of Service:  Check-In and Release], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when its designated check-in application (Block2Block) on the Flight Attendants’ Infight Mobile Device (IMD) displayed cancelled trips that were not cancelled in Crew Access thereby inhibiting check-in for their trips and assessing them a No Show and 3 (three) attendance points.  Flight Attendants were unable to check in manually via a call to Crew Scheduling as it had excessive wait times.

Grievances Recently Filed and Denied

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-230-21- Violation of §16 Sick Leave/On the Job Injury.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §16 [Sick Leave/On the Job Injury], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it announced beginning on or about August 31, 2021, that it would grant pay protection per §21.M [Compensation: Pay Protection…] to vaccinated symptomatic and/or COVID+ Flight Attendants for scheduling obligations removed due to Company-directed quarantine in response to high-risk COVID-19 workplace exposures and deny pay protection under similar or the same circumstances for unvaccinated Flight Attendants or for Flight Attendants who decline to disclose their vaccination status and would instead require them to be removed from their scheduling obligations by forcing them onto sick leave and paid through their sick leave bank or accrued vacation pay if the sick leave bank was depleted. Neither §16 nor §21.M contains any exceptions or distinctions based on vaccination status, yet the Company failed to bargain with the Association and unilaterally implemented such non-contractual exceptions or distinctions inequitably across the collective bargaining unit.

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-234-21-Violation of §21 Non-Negotiated Compensation.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §21 [Compensation], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it announced on or about September 2, 2021, that it would pay $200.00 to each vaccinated Flight Attendant who provides proof of vaccination to the Company by October 15, 2021.   Section 21 does not contain any exceptions or distinctions based on vaccination status, and the Company failed to bargain with the Association and unilaterally implemented such a non-contractual exception inequitably across the collective bargaining unit.

Grievances Previously Filed, Denied by Management and Currently Awaiting Arbitration Dates

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-22-14-Violation of Required Maternity Leave.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 15.D. and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to require Flight Attendants to begin Maternity Leave after the 28th week of pregnancy.   

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-55-17-Violation of §21.V Winds Aloft Adjustment of Sit Pay in JCTE.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §21.V [Compensation: “Scheduled” or “Actual” For Minimum Pay Rules (MPRs) and/or Sit Pay], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when its Jeppesen Crew Access (JCA) trading system displayed each posted trip as a static ‘snapshot’ taken at the time of posting rather than a ‘live’ view, thus denying the Flight Attendant the ability to determine whether a trip is eligible for 1.0 TFP of Sit Pay due to an automated scheduling adjustment (e.g. by the Winds Aloft program).

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-159-17-Violation of §12.A & §12.E Withholding Trips from Open Time and Suspended all Trading due JCTE Issues.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §12.A & E [Exchange of Sequences: Unlimited Trading/Open Time], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about September 30, 2017, to October 1, 2017, for approximately 8 hours, it either withheld all trips in open time or suspended all trading due to an issue with its Jeppesen Crew Tracking system.

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-321-18- Violation of §§21, 24, 30 & 34 Hotel at Domicile for Transition Training.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §21 [Compensation], §24 [General and Miscellaneous], §30 [Training] and §34 [Hotels], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when some Flight Attendants requested and were provided hotel rooms at base for Transition Training while others who requested a room were not provided one.   

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-40-19-Violation §25.B Failure to Provide a Safe and Healthy Workplace.  This alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §25.B [Air Safety, Health and Security: Safe and Healthy Workplace], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to provide a safe and healthy workplace when it installed new bulkheads on the retrofitted Airbus (“Aura”) aircraft that effectively renders the aft assist handles near doors L1/R1 as unusable and unnecessarily increases the likelihood and potential severity of Flight Attendant injury during an emergency evacuation.

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-41-19-Violation of §25.D.2 Failing to Notify MEC President and ASHSC of Reconfiguration or Re-design Prior to Final Decision. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §25.D.2 [Air Safety, Health and Security: Safety Information], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to notify the MEC President of a decision to reconfigure or re-design the interior of the Airbus aircraft and when it failed to discuss with the ASHSC the parties’ interests and concerns for inflight safety prior to making a final decision on the reconfiguration/re-design. 

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-162-19- Violation of §12.C.1 Real-Time Trading Procedures Grievance 36-99-2-28-17 Mediated Settlement.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §12.C.1 [Exchange of Sequences: Trading Procedure], past practice, its mediated settlement of grievance 36-99-2-28-17 and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it agreed but failed to adhere to its July 5, 2017, mediated settlement of grievance 36-99-2-28-17:  To have AFA and Alaska representatives meet with Jeppesen to explore the capabilities of the system and how to align the front-end with the “real time” experience of the back-end user.  This is a continual violation as such meeting did not take place in a reasonably timely manner, and sufficient action was not taken to rectify the underlying system issues.    

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-36-20-Violation of §25.B ANC Training Facility.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §25.B [Air Safety, Health and Security: Safe and Healthy Workplace], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it conducted Recurrent Training (RT) drills in Anchorage, Alaska in the Ross Aviation Hanger, and on or about February 16-19, 2020, the external temperature ranged from 18 to 46 degrees Fahrenheit and when the hanger door opened, frequently without notice, the internal hanger temperature dropped to as low as 46 degrees.  After the external hanger door opened it took approximately two hours with a loud heater to get the internal temperature back up to the low to mid 60s.  

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-207-20-Violation of §10, §11.D & §24.L Bundled Scheduling Notifications.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §10 [Scheduling], §11.D [Reserve:  Scheduling/Notice of Time to Report] and §24.L [General and Miscellaneous: Company-Provided Inflight Mobile Device (IMD)], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when its Jeppesen Crew Access (JCA) scheduling system sent bundled scheduling notifications to Flight Attendants on their Inflight Mobile Devices (IMDs) or directly in Crew Access, requiring Flight Attendants to batch acknowledge or ignore such notifications and thereby resulting in Flight Attendants potentially waiving multiple contractual protections via an extra-contractual point of contact (i.e. Crew Access scheduling notifications).  

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-301-20-Violation of §3.D Scope of Agreement.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §3.D [Scope of Agreement:  Scope], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it announced beginning October 2020 through July 2021, it will operate flights with cargo in cabin seats; although such flying will occur without passengers, the Company intends to staff the flights with non-Flight Attendant employees, who will be trained to perform Flight Attendant duties, specifically including but not limited to:  Firefighting duties, cargo stowage in the passenger cabin and aircraft door operation in normal and emergency mode.    

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-384-20-Violation of §10.S Scheduling Notifications.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §10.S [Scheduling :  Pre-Cancellations], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it used non-contractual scheduling notifications sent to Flight Attendants via the Crew Scheduling system in order to communicate and assign alternate flying or an obligation to call Crew Scheduling within a specific window of time.  If a Flight Attendant accepts such non-contractual scheduling notification(s), which is neither contact by Crew Scheduling via Company email nor via primary phone contact as defined in §10.S.1.a, the scheduling notification(s) violates the contract by abrogating the Flight Attendant’s ability to: (1) decline the alternate assignment and waive pay protection (§10.S.2.b), (2) decline the “out of original footprint by more than two hours” alternate assignment and call Crew Scheduling between 6:00 PM and 8:00 PM (local domicile time) the night prior to the start of the original sequence (§10.S.2.c), or (3) waive pay protection and be relieved of any further scheduling obligation (§10.S.3). 

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-386-20-Violation of §8.Q & §8.R Contactability and Notification of Delay or Cancellation. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §8.Q [Hours of Service: Contactability] and §8.R [Hours of Service: Notification of Delay or Cancellation], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it used non-contractual scheduling notifications sent via the Crew Scheduling system in order to communicate and assign revised flying to Flight Attendants who were off-duty on a remain overnight (RON). Such scheduling notifications are in violation of the contractually defined means of contact and/or the Flight Attendant’s obligation to respond pursuant to these provisions.

Joint Contract Negotiations Session 14 – April 2026

The JNC continued its thorough review of both the Alaska and Hawaiian vacation systems, engaging in productive discussions with key company stakeholders. A collaborative approach was proposed to address the complex provisions, ensuring that all parties’ needs are considered. Looking ahead, the committee is preparing to gather feedback through a Crew Meal Survey and anticipates further sessions with management from June 2 to June 4.

Celebrating Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month

May is Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month in the United States—a time to celebrate the vibrant stories, achievements, and enduring impact of these communities. Their cultures, traditions, and innovations have enriched every facet of American life, from art and science to activism and public service. What started in 1978 as a weeklong observance […]

Join The Picket Line: Support Horizon Flight Attendants on Tuesday, April 28

Since November 2023, Horizon Air Flight Attendants have been in negotiations, fighting tirelessly to secure a new contract that recognizes their work. Even after applying for mediation in January 2025, management continues to offer proposals that ignore the essential contributions Horizon Flight Attendants make to the success of Horizon Air and Alaska Air Group.  On […]

Scheduling Committee Meeting Recap – April 2026

This message is for pre-merger Alaska Flight Attendants On Tuesday, April 21, our pre-merger Alaska AFA Scheduling Committee Chairpersons and Representatives met in person at the Alaska Airlines Global Training Center in Renton, WA to discuss their ongoing work to represent our Flight Attendants and push for improvements in our workplace. Representing you at the […]

Hotel Committee Meeting Recap – April 2026

On Monday, April 13, our AFA Local Hotel Committee Chairpersons met virtually to receive an update about current layover hotels and transportation providers and discuss concerns with management. Representing you at the meeting were Dori Marron (ANC), Jarod McNeill (SEA pmAS), Kelly Hepworth (PDX), Barry Spitzer (SFO), Brian Sherill (LAX pmAS), and Kanani Vallot (SAN), […]

Recent Posts

News By Month

News By Category

AFA News Now Air Quality Air Safety, Health, & Security Committee (ASHSC) Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) AS/HA Merger AS/VX Merger Benefits Committee Committees Communications Committee Contract Contract 2014 Negotiations Blog Council 15 SAN Council 18 LAX (pmAS) Council 19 SEA (pmAS) Council 30 ANC Council 35 SFO Council 39 PDX Council 43 HNL Council 47 LAX/SEA (pmHA) EAP/Professional Standards Committee Extension 2021 Blog Featured Government Affairs Committee Grievance Committee Hotel Committee Human Rights & Equity Committee Industry News Inflight Service Committee Inflight Training Committee JNC Blog Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) Latest News Local Councils Master Executive Council (MEC) Membership Engagement Committee Message from the MEC President Mobilization Committee Negotiations Pairing Construction Preferential Bidding System (PBS) Press Releases Reserve Committee Retirement Committee Scheduling Committee Uniform Committee

Want To Stay In The Loop?

Stay up-to-date on AFA Alaska + Hawaiian news and information by signing up for our email and text message updates. Click a button below to get started or update your preferences if you're already a subscriber.
Sign Up for Emails
Sign Up for Text Updates