The Master Executive Council (MEC) has been very hard at work ensuring disciplinary due process and contractual compliance on your behalf. CBA §20.N.2 allows for ten arbitration dates per year to argue discipline/termination cases and contractual issues. AFA typically prioritizes termination cases 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. The following is a list of open contractual grievances.

Grievance set for April arbitration:

On April 20, 2017, AFA will be arbitrating a disciplinary grievance.

Grievances settled:

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-10-16- Mandatory Attendance Counseling in Violation of Section 32. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 32.A. [Attendance Policy/Reporting Procedure], Section 32.E.1. [Attendance/Control Procedure/Attendance Policy Disciplinary Action], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the Railway Labor Act when it required Flight Attendants to attend meetings to discuss sick leave under the guise of an investigation when in fact it was a counseling in violation of Section 32.E.1.

Settlement details: 1) All attendance counseling will be in compliance with Section 32; and 2) Any investigation into suspected abuse of sick leave will be conducted by inflight supervisory employees who have been trained and are proficient in conducting disciplinary investigation. Proficiency is established by attending a formal training class conducted by Alaska Airlines Legal and/or Labor Relations Department.     

Grievances recently filed and awaiting an answer:

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-18-17-Violation of §12.G.3 & §10.Y.7 SIP’d Sequences in Open Time. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §12.G.3 [Exchanges of Sequences: Sequence Interruption Point (SIP) Sequences] & §10.Y.7 [Scheduling: Sequence Construction], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to identify SIP sequences placed into Open Time by the Company for pick-up/trade by Flight Attendants or assigned to (or self-assigned by) Reserve Flight Attendants; and thereby failed to pay all eligible Minimum Pay Rules on such sequences pursuant to §21.D [Compensation: Minimum Pay Rules].

Grievances recently granted by management:

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-4-17- Violation of §9.E. & §12.E. All Open Time Trips Withheld from Open Time and Premium Pay Removed. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 9.E. [Junior Available//and Premium Open Time/Premium Open Time] & 12.E. [Exchange of Sequences/Open Time], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about February 9, 2017, all Open Time trips across the entire system were withheld from Open Time and premium pay was removed.

Details: The Company proposed to meet and discuss remedies if merited, and AFA is attempting to schedule a meeting to resolve.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-6-17- Violation of §11.E. Low Time First Available (LTFA) Out of Order Assignments January 31 to February 2, 2017. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 11.E. [Reserve/Order of Assignment], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about January 31, 2017, at 8:00pm PST to February 2, 2017, at 11:00am PST, Crew Scheduling assigned Reserve Flight Attendants out of order because of the inability for Crew Scheduling to accurately verify order of assignments due to the cutover to the new crew tracking and scheduling system, Jeppesen Crew Access (JCA).

Details: The Company proposed to meet and discuss remedies if merited, and AFA is attempting to schedule a meeting to resolve.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-7-17- Violation of §11.E. Low Time First Available (LTFA) Out of Order Assignments Post Jeppesen Crew Access (JCA) Cutover. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 11.E. [Reserve/Order of Assignment], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when starting on or about February 2, 2017 at 11:00am PST, and including all subsequent violations, Crew Scheduling assigned Reserve Flight Attendants out of order because of the inability for Crew Scheduling to accurately verify order of assignments due to the cutover to the new crew tracking and scheduling system, Jeppesen Crew Access (JCA).

Details: The Company proposed to meet and discuss remedies if merited, and AFA is attempting to schedule a meeting to resolve.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-8-17- Violation of §29.A. Failure of Company to Include All Eligible Earnings in Calculation of Performance Based Pay (PBP). This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 29.A. [Profit Sharing and Retirement], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed, from December 2014 to present, to include all eligible earnings (as described in the Alaska Airlines, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan) in the PBP payout for Flight Attendants, including but not limited to: Longevity Premium (§21.C.) and Sit Pay (§21.T.).

Details: The Company corrected and issued retro 2015 & 2016 PBP payments on March 3, 2017.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-9-17- Violation of §23.C.2.a Failure to Include all TFP Earnings in Monthly Long Term Disability (LTD) Benefit. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 23.C.2.a [Insurance Benefits: Long Term Disability Insurance Plan/Benefits], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to include all TFP earnings, including but not limited to: Longevity Premium (§21.C) and Sit Pay (§21.T) in Flight Attendants’ monthly Long Term Disability benefit.

Details: The Company is currently in the process of conducting an LTD audit to determine the amount due to Flight Attendants impacted by the error.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-10-17- Violation of §11.F.15, §11.H.7 & §11.H.8 Failure to Provide Automated Ability for Reserve Flight Attendants to Self-Assign and Trade APSB. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §11.F.15 [Reserve: Airport Standby], §11.H.7 & §11.H.8 [Reserve: Reserve Exchange of Days, Pick-Ups and Trades], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to provide automated ability for Reserve Flight Attendants to self-assign and trade airport standby (APSB) assignments due to the cutover to the new crew tracking and scheduling system, Jeppesen Crew Access (JCA).

Details: The Company proposed to meet and discuss remedies if merited, and AFA is attempting to schedule a meeting to resolve.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-11-17- Violation of §21.V Failure to Compensate for Sit Pay on Pairings Adjusted by Winds Aloft Program. 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 it failed to compensate for sit pay (1.0 TFP) on pairings adjusted by Winds Aloft program which made them eligible for sit pay; and then the pairing was picked up by another Flight Attendant from one-way trades and/or open time; and the sit time on said pairing was subsequently adjusted below the required 2:01 time for sit pay.   =

Details: Flight Attendants will need to submit an Activity Claim Form to be paid for “disappearing” sit time.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-12-17- Violation of §12.C.2-3 Allowing Out of Domicile Trades, Pick-Ups, Drops and Give-Aways on Incorrect Dates. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §12.C.2-3 [Exchange of Sequences: Trading Procedures], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it allowed out of domicile trades, pick-ups, drops and give-aways on the fifteenth (15^th) and sixteenth (16^th) of the month rather than the required seventeenth (17^th) of the month.

Details: The Company proposed to meet and discuss remedies if merited, and AFA is attempting to schedule a meeting to resolve.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-13-17- Violation of §11.H.7-8 Denial of Automated Trading of Reserve Flight Attendant Assignments. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §11.H.7-8 [Reserve: Reserve Exchange of Days, Pick-Ups and Trades], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it denied Reserve Flight Attendants the ability to trade assigned trips, automated and processed in real time, due to the Jeppesen Crew Access trading system cutover.

Details: The Company proposed to meet and discuss remedies if merited, and AFA is attempting to schedule a meeting to resolve.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-14-17- Violation of §11.J.3 Reserve Repositioning Prior to Open Time Trading Day. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §11.J.3 [Reserve: Reserve Repositioning], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it allowed Reserve Flight Attendants to reposition their reserve days on a day prior to open time trading day.

Details: The Company proposed to meet and discuss remedies if merited, and AFA is attempting to schedule a meeting to resolve.

Grievances recently filed and denied 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 (2 ½) to Flight Attendants on qualified Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) status when they called in sick within two hours of scheduled check-in.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-15-17- Violation of §11.E.1.a Incorrect Reserve Self Assignment Start Time. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §11.E.1.a [Reserve: Order of Assignment/Reserve Self-Assignment], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it started reserve self-assignment at 10:01am PT rather than 10:00am.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-16-17-Violation of §11.E.1.a Incorrect Reserve Self Assignment Start Time in ANC. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §11.E.1.a [Reserve: Order of Assignment/Reserve Self-Assignment], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it started reserve self-assignment at 11:01am PT (10:01 AKT) rather than 10:00am PT (9:00am AKT).

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-17-17-Violation of §15.C Medical Leave of Absence. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §15.C [Leaves of Absence: Medical Leave of Absence], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it denied Flight Attendants a Medical Leave of Absence because they did not also qualify for FMLA.

Grievances previously filed 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 28^th week of pregnancy.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-6-15- Incorrect Assessment of a No Show. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 32 and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it incorrectly assessed a No Show to a Flight Attendant on November 30, 2014.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-15-15- Limiting Access to the SAN Domicile. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 28.I [Company Provided Computers and Printers at Domiciles], when it limited access to the SAN Domicile including contractually required resources to only those Flight Attendants based in SAN.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-20-15- Converting a Line Holding Flight Attendant to ER Reserve Outside of her/his Contactable Period. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 11.C.3.b.6 [Conversion of Reserves to ER] and 11.C.3.c [ER Contactability], when it converted a line holding Flight Attendant to ER Reserve outside of her/his contactable period.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-24-15- Ground Floor Lodging While on Company Business. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 34 [Hotels], when it failed to avoid ground floor lodging for Flight Attendants attending company required Beyond Service training.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-29-15-Commuter Boarding Priority. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 28.G.6. and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it allowed Company employees (and their dependents) on pleasure travel to be given higher boarding priority than commuting Flight Attendants.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-32-15- Concourse Uniform Shoe Standards. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 25.B. and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and past practice when it issued Revised Emergency Interim Bulletin 15-23 (Inflight Bulletin 2015-0179) requiring Flight Attendants to wear concourse shoes: With a defined heel between a half inch and three inches in height; with added restrictions, i.e., solid black in color, single functional strap with a plain silver or gold buckle, button, or snap smaller than a quarter, and no textured leather, suede, cloth fabric, color threading, or separate colored trim styles; and during boarding up until the aircraft door closes. These restrictions essentially limit Flight Attendants to wear a pump type shoe only, and unlike past practice eliminates many ‘healthy shoe styles’, e.g., Danskos, Naot, and makes them non-compliant.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-33-15- In-Flight Uniform Shoe Standards. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 25.B. and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and past practice when it issued Revised Emergency Interim Bulletin 15-23 (Inflight Bulletin 2015-0179) requiring Flight Attendants to wear in-flight shoes with all concourse shoe requirements except the defined heel (with at least half inch height) requirement until the aircraft door closes. Unlike past practice these restrictions eliminate many ‘healthy shoe styles’, e.g., Danskos and Naot, and makes them non-compliant.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-34-15- Uniform Luggage Standards. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the Railway Labor Act when it issued Emergency Interim Bulletin 15-23 (Inflight Bulletin 2015-0179) which says: Designated “Crew” luggage tag and/or Company-approved recognition luggage strap is the only permitted accessory/adornment that may be attached on luggage items; recreational equipment must fit into company issued luggage; and individual or union lanyards with personal pins may not be worn.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-41-15- Section 34.C.3. Alternative Hotel Selection/Site Visit. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Section 34.C.3. and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to include the hotel committee in the selection of alternate hotels; and when it failed to provide site visits on alternate hotels.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-2-16- Violation of ASAP and Discipline LOA. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Letter of Agreement: ASAP and Discipline July 2006 and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to allow the ASAP process to complete prior to disciplining and terminating a Flight Attendant. The Letter of Agreement specifically states, “Flight Attendants participating in the ASAP program, whether reporting or non-reporting as defined in the ASAP Memorandum of Understanding, will not be subject to discipline. Neither the written ASAP report nor the content of the written ASAP report will be used to initiate or support any company disciplinary action.”

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-5-16- Non-Negotiated Compensation. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 21 [Compensation] and Section 32 [Attendance Policy], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the Railway Labor Act when it awarded, without prior consistent notice, policy and application, $5 gift cards to all Anchorage based Flight Attendants for meeting the daily attendance goal.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-31-16- Benefit Re-enrollment-Failure to Provide Insurance. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 23 [Insurance Benefits], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it: Intended to deny insurance to Flight Attendants who fail to reenroll following any duration leave of absence; and failed to provide sufficient notice regarding insurance reenrollment following any leave of absence.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-32-16- Automation of Stranded and Delay Pay. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 21 [Compensation], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it continues to automate its payroll system yet failed to include automated stranded pay for the entire crew.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-40-16- Violation of Paternal Leave §15.E.2. & §15.M. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Sections 15.E.2. & 15.M. [Leaves of Absence/Parental Leaves of Absence], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to allow a Flight Attendant to utilize sick leave or vacation while on a paternal leave of absence.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-43-16- Violation of §11.H.8. Failing to Allow Trades. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 11.H.8. [Reserve/Reserve Exchange of Days, Pick-Ups and Trades], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to allow Reserve Flight Attendants, [Flight Attendant Names], to trade on December 18, 2016, and December 30, 2016, under its provisions; it failed to allow other Flight Attendants to do trades on other various dates as well.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-2-17- Violation of §11.H.7. Denial of Reserve Automated Posting and Trading of Assignments. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 11.H.7. [Reserve/Reserve Exchange of Days, Pick-Ups and Trades], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when its new Jeppesen Crew Access trading system denied Reserve Flight Attendants automated posting and trading of reserve assignments.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-3-17- Violation §30.A.3.c. Failure to Pay for Lodging for Recurrent Training. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement Section 30.A.3.c. [Reserve/Reserve Exchange of Days, Pick-Ups and Trades], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to pay for a Flight Attendant’s lodging when she came to Seattle to attend required Recurrent Training.

In Solidarity,

Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Linda Christou, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Tim Green, Brice McGee; MEC Grievance Committee Chairperson Stephanie Adams; and AFA Senior Staff Attorney Kimberley Chaput