AFA Alaska + Hawaiian

Representing the Flight Attendants of Alaska + Hawaiian

Click here to report an issue to AFA
You are here: Home / Archives for Master Executive Council (MEC)

Recent Changes to COVID-19 Policies – Part 3

Master Executive Council (MEC) and Grievance Committee

Click here for Part 2 >

Click here for Part 1 >

In This Update

  • Forgiveness of §32 Attendance Points Assessed for September COVID-19 Workplace Exposure Quarantines
  • Grievance No. 36-99-2-241-21 “Violation of §32 Attendance Policy/COVID-19”
  • Management Unwilling to Offer or Negotiate School/Childcare Exposure Absence Mitigations
  • Applying for Medical or Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs Exemptions to the Vaccination Mandate
  • Reasonable Accommodations for Approved Exemptions
  • Employees Currently on a Continuous Leave of Absence
  • Non-Compliance

Forgiveness of §32 Attendance Policy Points Assessed for September COVID-19 Workplace Exposure Quarantines

AFA and management have reached an agreement to forgive all Section 32 Attendance Policy points that were assessed for any COVID-19 workplace exposure quarantines that began in the month of September. Otherwise, Section 32 Attendance Policy points potentially apply (unless reduced by Quarterly Point Reduction) for any Flight Attendants on a workplace exposure quarantine who disclosed that they were not fully vaccinated or who declined to disclose their vaccination status during the contact tracing intake conversation with management related to that workplace exposure. Management is currently working on implementing the points forgiveness, so Flight Attendants should expect to be notified of an adjustment in the coming weeks.

Grievance No. 36-99-2-241-21 “Violation of §32 Attendance Policy/COVID-19”

Although the one-time agreement above resolves points accrued in the month of September, unvaccinated or “decline to disclose vaccination status” Flight Attendants are potentially accruing points for COVID-19 workplace exposure quarantines going forward beginning October 1st. Consequently, AFA has filed Grievance No. 36-99-2-241-21 “Violation of §32 Attendance Policy/COVID-19”:

The Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §32 [Attendance Policy], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about October 1, 2021, it unilaterally imposed an inequitable non-contractual policy of administering absences for Company-mandated COVID-19 workplace exposure quarantines under the Section 32 Attendance Policy solely to Flight Attendants who are classified as “unvaccinated” pursuant to Company policy, and thereby, potentially subjecting these Flight Attendants to disciplinary action up to and including termination resulting from such attendance points accrual. Vaccinated Flight Attendants do not accrue attendance points under this unilaterally imposed Company policy.

Management Unwilling to Offer or Negotiate School/Childcare Exposure Absence Mitigations

AFA has made several attempts to advocate to management for the need to offer or negotiate school/childcare COVID-19 exposure absence mitigations for Flight Attendants. It is extremely disappointing that management’s position regarding relief not just for FAs but for all employees with school age children is that you’re essentially on your own to manage your schedule and to do your best to not get fired for absences related to school/childcare quarantines. Is this doing the right thing?

Reminder: Flight Attendants may call out Sick Child if their child is ill, and they will not accrue attendance points if the Flight Attendant has sufficient sick leave to cover the entire absence. No attendance points apply for time off to care for a sick child unless the Flight Attendant does not have enough sick leave to cover the absence. See Bulletin #2021-0059 for more information about the Company’s application in these circumstances. Please note aspects of this application remains in dispute via ongoing litigation.

Applying for Medical or Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs Exemptions to the Vaccination Mandate

Management is now accepting requests for reasonable accommodation for medical conditions and/or sincerely held religious beliefs that prevents employees from getting vaccinated against COVID-19. An employee may apply for one or both if they qualify. The entire accommodations process (e.g., requests, review, determination, and administration) is directly between employer and employee. For liability reasons, AFA cannot and will not be a party to this process, but we will communicate what we know when possible. 

Medical exemptions

Management is requiring signed and dated medical documentation from a healthcare provider that indicates the medical reason for the exemption request. Applications lacking the required information will be denied. 

Click here to submit a request for medical accommodation (AAG SSO required) >

Sincerely held religious beliefs exemptions

Management does not require separate documentation to substantiate an exemption request for sincerely held religious beliefs, but you may attach additional documentation if you so choose. Management may also ask for additional supporting information.

Click here to submit a request for religious accommodation (AAG SSO required) >

Reasonable Accommodations for Approved Exemptions

Unpaid leaves or regular COVID-19 testing?

AFA has received numerous inquiries whether the reasonable accommodation will be an unpaid leave or regular COVID-19 testing. Management has indicated a strong desire to keep as many employees working as possible. The reality is the Company would have an extremely challenging time working through a staffing shortage in mid-December and beyond in almost every division. However, there are serious concerns and questions about how regular testing would be administered, and it is unclear if there will be a reliable supply of accessible COVID tests. 

Potential seniority violations?

There could conceivably be multiple forms of accommodation both within and between workgroups. Accommodations are usually granted and administered on a case-by-case basis, so this is yet another unprecedented situation courtesy of the pandemic. We are currently working with AFA Legal to determine how much influence the Association might have over the administration of multiple accommodations within the Flight Attendant group if those accommodations potentially create seniority violations.

Appealing and/or disputing a reasonable accommodation request

AFA has also received numerous inquiries how to appeal and/or dispute an approved accommodation request—particularly if the accommodation is an unpaid leave. Any request for appeal or a dispute arising from the accommodation process—regardless of whether an exemption is approved or denied—should be directed back to the employer by the employee. If the parties cannot reach a mutually acceptable resolution, then the employee should file a complaint with the appropriate government agency that owns regulatory oversight for that accommodation.  For a complaint related to a medical accommodation, an ADA complaint falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice.  Complaints related to religious accommodations fall under the authority of the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC).

Employees Currently on a Continuous Leave of Absence

Management has indicated that employees who are currently on a continuous leave of absence will be provided with adequate time to be vaccinated or request a reasonable accommodation upon their return to work and the associated deadline will be extended accordingly.

Non-Compliance

Finally, the big question: What happens if a Flight Attendant does not file for or is denied an exemption, and the Flight Attendant declines to be vaccinated? It is still too early to say with certainty because management is still developing the policy, but it seems very likely that management will pursue termination of employment if the employee cannot comply.  Despite this possibility, there is no firm direction from management at this time.

AFA will continue to monitor and provide updates as management offers clarification and/or additional information becomes available.  

Recent Changes to COVID-19 Policies – Part 2

Recent Changes to COVID-19 Policies – Part 2

Master Executive Council (MEC) and Grievance Committee

Click here for Part 1 >

In This Update

  • Presidential Executive Order Vaccination Mandate

Presidential Executive Order Vaccination Mandate

Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air are government contractors and their employees subject to the related vaccination requirements under the Presidential Executive Order

As you have almost certainly heard by now, Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air have determined that they are federal contractors and therefore their employees are subject to the vaccination requirements under the Presidential Executive Order. See the Company email to all employees “Important information about required vaccinations“ (September 30, 2021) for more information. Southwest, American, JetBlue and other airlines have likewise determined that the mandate applies to them.

What does this mean for Air Group?

First and foremost, vaccine mandates are legal and constitutional. The government has a compelling interest in public health, and the United States Supreme Court has upheld vaccination mandates in the past. Under the Executive Order (EO), all Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air employees will be required to be fully vaccinated or have an approved exemption on file as early as December 8, 2021 (unless this date subsequently gets pushed).

Immunity from a prior COVID-19 infection is not sufficient under the mandate. To be considered fully vaccinated prior to that date, your last Pfizer or Moderna shot, or your single Johnson & Johnson shot, must be no later than November 24, 2021.  Regular testing under the EO is not considered an adequate substitute unless it is part of an accommodation for an approved exemption on file for substantiated medical reasons or a sincerely held religious belief.

Medical / Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) exemptions

If you are unable to receive any of the available vaccines for medical reasons, your employer must attempt to reasonably accommodate your disability.  An accommodation can involve making changes to your work environment to protect you and others, a long-term leave, or perhaps something in between, such as regular testing. The actual accommodation would depend both on the disability and the workplace and nature of the business. An employer is not required to make any particular accommodation you request, or to make an accommodation that would cause an undue hardship, which means great expense, inconvenience or disruption of the workplace. Alaska and Horizon management have not yet informed us how they intend to accommodate medical exemptions, or what medical evidence they will require to establish an exemption. Medical exemptions are rare, as most people can well-tolerate the COVID-19 vaccines.

Sincerely held religious belief exemptions

If an employee states that he or she has a sincerely held religious objection to vaccination, the employer must generally accept this as true—even if the religion (or other moral belief) is unfamiliar to the employer. However, employers are entitled to question and probe the belief, and may consider factors such as:

  • Whether the employee has behaved in a manner markedly inconsistent with the professed belief;
  • Whether the accommodation sought is a particularly desirable benefit that is likely to be sought for secular reasons; 
  • Whether the timing of the request renders it suspect (e.g., it follows an earlier request by the employee for the same benefit for secular reasons); and 
  • Whether the employer otherwise has reason to believe the accommodation is not sought for religious reasons.

Proof of vaccination

The vaccine mandate requires the Company to collect proof of vaccination from all employees who do not have a medical or religious exemption. You will not simply be able to attest that you have been vaccinated; you will be required to show one of the following:

  • A copy of the record of immunization from a health care provider or pharmacy;
  • A copy of the COVID-19 Vaccination Record Card;
  • A copy of medical records documenting the vaccination;
  • A copy of immunization records from a public health or state immunization information system; or
  • A copy of any other official documentation verifying vaccination with information on the vaccine name, date(s) of administration, and the name of health care professional or clinic site administering the vaccine.

Data privacy and HIPAA

This information is not protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), because employers such as Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air are not covered entities under HIPAA. According to the latest guidance from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the employer does, however, have an obligation to safeguard this as confidential medical information under the ADA that must be stored separately from the employee’s personnel file.

AFA leaders will be meeting with management soon to gain clarity on how the Executive Order will be administered. The bottom line is that the mandate does apply to us under federal law, and we cannot negotiate around it or grieve it.  AFA will continue to advocate on behalf of the entire membership and to fairly represent all Flight Attendants throughout these challenging times.

Stay tuned for more updates.

Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 3

Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 3

Master Executive Council (MEC), Grievance Committee, Benefits Committee

This is the third in a series reporting on management’s opposition to various state and local laws, the latest developments to complex state law litigations related to these laws that are playing out in Washington and California, and what Flight Attendants can do about it.

Read Part 2 here >

Read Part 1 here >

In This Edition

  • WA Long Term Care (Cares Fund)
  • CA 2021 COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave

WA Long Term Care (Cares Fund)

Management will unilaterally decline to initiate payroll deductions for flight crew in January 2022

The Washington Cares Fund is the nation’s first state-administered long-term care insurance program. Benefits will be funded by a 0.58% employee-paid payroll tax beginning January 1, 2022. However, Alaska Airlines management has unilaterally taken the position that the WA Cares Fund does not apply to flight crew and therefore will not initiate payroll deductions this coming January. In an email titled “Important Information About Washington’s Long-Term Care Act” (July 8, 2021), management advised all WA-domiciled Alaska Airlines Flight Attendants that flight crew may still consider pursuing a permanent one-time opt-out of the Program and all associated taxes and benefits by obtaining private long-term care insurance prior to the deadline of November 1, 2021. Currently, there is no opt-out option for any employee who becomes domiciled in (i.e., employed in) Washington after the applicable deadlines.

If management will not deduct flight crew contributions, then why bother opting out?

Flight Attendants may eventually change jobs within the Company (i.e., transfer to another position that is not classified as flight crew) or work for other employers within Washington. Additionally, the Company’s position regarding flight crew is currently untested from a legal perspective. It is entirely possible that the courts may eventually require Alaska Airlines to withhold WA Cares Fund payroll contributions on behalf of flight crew.

Grossly unfair to non-resident employees

Although all WA-domiciled flight crew would otherwise theoretically be required to contribute to the fund (except for management’s unilateral position regarding flight crew and certain state and local laws), only Washington residents may utilize Care Fund benefits. This is grossly unfair to non-resident flight crew (i.e., out of state commuters). Consequently, AFA Alaska agrees with and supports ALPA Alaska in filing legal objections with Washington State regarding concerns that the WA Cares Fund violates the Dormant Commerce Clause, which is inferred from Article I of the US Constitution, and the Privileges and Immunities Clause, which is derived from Article IV, Section 2 of the US Constitution. Resolution under this path could take a very long time, so this is another reason that non-resident WA-domiciled flight crew might consider opting out if possible.

Challenges with opting out

Unfortunately, it is extremely challenging to opt out unless you started applying for private insurance many, many months ago—especially if you are younger. AFA is unaware of any private insurers who are currently offering new long-term care policies. Additionally, there is a significant administrative backlog of applications with all known private insurers, so it is very concerning—and unknown—whether all pending policies will be executed prior to the November 1st deadline.

Will I be required to directly contribute to the WA Cares Fund or pay back contributions not made on my behalf?

Quite simply, it is unclear but doubtful. Again, AFA Alaska agrees with and supports ALPA Alaska filing legal objections with Washington State regarding concerns that the WA Cares Fund raises due process problems insofar as the law does not specify who bears consequences for an employer’s failure to remit employee premiums or what those consequences would be. However, there is no mechanism for employees to make direct contributions to the WA Care Fund, and there is no provision in the law to recoup contributions not withheld and made by the employer.

Interestingly, Alaska Airlines management personnel from the People Team (i.e., Human Resources) have advised individual Flight Attendants who have directly inquired with them that the Company would “likely” be required to pay back the contributions owed on behalf of flight crew if Washington State came back and said that flight crew are required to pay such contributions. This is presumably under a scenario in which the State of Washington prevailed in the courts pursuant to this almost-inevitable dispute. However, Alaska Airlines management has not responded to the Association’s inquiry to confirm such guidance prior to publication of this update.

Estimated (theoretical) contributions

$25k gross annual earnings = ~$12/month | $50k gross annual earnings = ~$24/month | $75k gross annual earnings = ~$36/month | $100k gross annual earnings = ~$48/month

CA 2021 COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave

Up to 80 paid hours for certain COVID-19 related absences from a separate employer-paid sick bank

One of the more notable temporary COVID-19 laws is California’s 2021 COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave. The law was effective as of March 29, 2021, was retroactive to January 1, 2021, and ends soon on September 30, 2021.  It states that California employees will be paid up to 80 hours by the employer rather than through the employee’s own sick leave bank for COVID-19 related quarantines, vaccination appointments and vaccine symptoms. Click here for FAQs. Thus far, management has denied all requests from Flight Attendants to comply with the law, e.g., to pay out of the separate COVID-19 sick bank.  

Filing a claim

Any CA-domiciled Flight Attendant who has used Sick Leave for COVID-19 related absences between January 1st and September 30th should file a claim or a report of a labor law violation with the Labor Commissioner’s Office, which is the state agency charged with enforcement. Please file a claim as soon as possible, but our understanding is that the state accepts such claims for up to three years. Flight Attendants also always have the option to hire their own attorney at their own expense if so desired.

AFA Alaska representatives are here to help

Although AFA cannot represent any FAs regarding such claims, we would very much appreciate you keeping us posted on any developments. Outside counsel has already responded to some claims with very official-looking but in our opinion not entirely on point legalese. AFA Alaska representatives are more than willing to help by supplying basic information and tips, and we would cooperate with any requests from claim investigators. Do not let management’s legal tactics put you off from pressing forward with your rightful claim!

Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 2

Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 2

Master Executive Council (MEC), Grievance Committee, Benefits Committee

This is the second in a series reporting on management’s opposition to various state and local laws, the latest developments to complex state law litigations related to these laws that are playing out in Washington and California, and what Flight Attendants can do about it.

Read Part 1 here >

In This Edition

  • Definition of Sick Family/Sick Child
  • Applicable State Laws
  • Filing a Claim with the Appropriate Agency

Most Liberal of the Flight Attendant Domicile State Laws Definition of “Sick Family/Sick Child”

The Roberts Decision and LOA 5 Sick Family/Sick Child

AFA arbitrated Grievance No. 36-99-02-49-03 “Family Leave Benefits” in 2005, which resulted in a favorable ruling for AFA by now-deceased Arbitrator Thomas Roberts. This award, which is usually referenced as “The Roberts Decision” by AFA and management, was at least in part subsequently incorporated into the current contract via Letter of Agreement 5 “Sick Family/Sick Child”:

[W]henever the collective-bargaining agreement refers to a sick child, it is understood that this is a placeholder for “family member.” With the Association’s agreement, the Company will apply the most liberal of the laws of the states in which Flight Attendants are domiciled in determining the appropriate definition of “family member.” When this definition is determined, including any subsequent amendments pursuant to changes in the law or in the interpretation of the law, the Company will publish the definition and distribute it to the Flight Attendants.

Through arbitration and bargaining, the Company is required to apply the most liberal of the Flight Attendant domicile state laws definition of “family member” for whom a Flight Attendant may utilize sick leave to care for that individual, under what circumstances and whether Flight Attendants will receive points under the Attendance Policy for such absences.

Updated list of qualified family members for Sick Family/Sick Child (as of August 30, 2021)

“Family member” includes: • Spouse • Registered domestic partner • Child (biological, step, adopted, foster, legal ward, or registered domestic partner’s child) of any age • Parent (biological, adoptive, step, foster, parent-in-law, or registered domestic partner’s parent) • Legal guardian of the F/A, spouse, or registered domestic partner as a minor • Individual with whom the F/A has or had an in loco parentis relationship – persons in loco parentis are those with day-to-day responsibilities to care for or financially support a child, or who had such responsibility for the employee when the employee was a child • Grandparent • Grandchild • Sibling

Points for Sick Family/Sick Child (in dispute)

Generally, no points apply for time off to care for the above individuals unless the Flight Attendant does not have enough sick leave to cover the absence. See Bulletin #2021-0059 for more information about the Company’s application in these circumstances. Please note this application remains in dispute via ongoing litigation.

Applicable State Laws

Summary

✅ = Honored | ⚠ = Partially honored and/or in dispute | 🚫 = Denied

State laws that AFA believes should apply to flight crew include but are not limited to:

  • Washington
    • WA Family Care Act (WFCA) – 🚫
    • WA Paid Sick Leave (WPSL) – 🚫
    • WA Paid Family Leave (WPFL) – 🚫
    • WA Long Term Care (Cares Fund) – 🚫
  • Oregon
    • OR Family Leave Act (OFLA) – 🚫
    • OR Paid Family and Medical Leave Insurance (PFMLI) – N/A
  • California
    • CA State Disability Insurance (CASDI) – ✅
    • CA Family Rights Act (CFRA) – 🚫
    • CA Family School Partnership Act – 🚫
  • All
    • Wage statement laws: AK, WA, OR – ✅; CA = ⚠
    • Supplemental/temporary COVID-19 leave laws – 🚫

Washington

WA Family Care Act (WFCA)

  • Reference:  RCW 49.12
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs:  Use of accrued vacation pay to care for qualified family members under certain conditions.
  • Status:  State of WA & AFA won lawsuit in 9th Circuit Court of Appeals; however, the Company continues to appeal at state level.
  • AS Compliance: No
  • Contact Information:  Washington State Department of Labor and Industries | Mailing Address: PO Box 44000 Olympia, WA  98504-4000 | Phone:  360-902-5800 | Website:  www.lni.wa.gov –> For Workers –> File a Workplace Complaint

WA Paid Sick Leave (WPSL)

  • Reference:  Initiative 1433
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs: (1) Employees can use sick leave for preventative care for themselves and/or applicable family members. (2) Discipline and infractions that may lead to discipline (including Attendance Points) cannot be assessed for use of paid SL. (3) Employees can use paid SL on the 90th calendar day of employment (i.e., during FA probationary period).
  • Status:  A4A is appealing summary judgment motion in favor of State of WA & AFA.  The State of WA won in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals; however, the Company continues to appeal.
  • AS Compliance: No
  • Contact Information: Washington State Department of Labor and Industries | Mailing Address: PO Box 44000 Olympia, WA  98504-4000 | Phone:  360-902-5800 | Website:  www.lni.wa.gov –> For Workers –> File a Workplace Complaint

WA Paid Family Leave (WPFL)

  • Reference: Builds on FMLA & RCW 50A
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs: WPFL is a statewide insurance program that ensures paid family leave for various situations. WPFL usually covers 12 weeks of leave, or up to 18 weeks in certain circumstances, and workers receive between $100 and $1,000 per week depending on their income.
  • Status:  No known disputes currently. – Premiums were to be deducted starting January 1, 2019, and leaves were to be allowed beginning January 1, 2020. 
  • AS Compliance: No
  • Contact Information:  Employment Security Department | Phone:  1-833-717-2273 | Email:  paidleave@esd.wa.gov | Website:paidleave.wa.gov

WA Long Term Care (Cares Fund)

  • Reference:  RCW 50B.04
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs:  The WA Cares Fund was created to reduce pressure on the Medicaid system. Once vested, you will be eligible to access a maximum lifetime benefit of $36,500 (adjusted for inflation) to pay for expenses associated with needing assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Unlike private insurance that generally requires you to be unable to do two ADLs, the WA Cares Fund requires that individuals need assistance with three ADLs to qualify. Examples of ADLs: Dressing, bathing, cognitive impairment, and other basic functions of your daily routine. Benefits are not portable or payable if you reside outside of Washington state at the time the benefit is needed.
  • Status:  No known disputes currently. – Paid for by a 0.58% tax on employee wages starting January 1, 2022, with benefits beginning in January 2025.
  • AS Compliance:  No – The Company does not intend to collect premiums.
  • Contact Information:  Washington State Department of Social and Health Services | Email:  wacaresfund@dshs.wa.gov | Website: http://www.wacaresfund.wa.gov/

Oregon

OR Family Leave Act (OFLA)

OR Paid Family and Medical Leave Insurance (OPFMLI)

  • Reference:  HB 2005​
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs: OPFMLI will provide 12 weeks of paid time off for various circumstances, with weekly benefits capped at $1215. The employee must have earned at least $1,000 in wages during the previous year. This leave will run concurrent with OFLA. 
  • Status: State pushing start date to January 2023 or later
  • AS Compliance:  N/A – Begins in 2023 or later, but AS will likely not follow the law.
  • Contact Information:  Oregon Employment Department | Mailing Address:  875 Union St. NE Salem, OR 97311 | Phone: 503-947-1394 | Email:  paidfamilyandmedicalleave@oregon.gov | Website: https://www.oregon.gov/employ/PFMLI/Pages/default.aspx

California

CA State Disability Insurance (CASDI)

  • Reference:  California Unemployment Insurance Code §2601 et seq.
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs:  Partial wage replacement for non-work disability: illness, injury and/or pregnancy. SDI contributions are paid by California workers covered by the SDI program.
  • Status:  No known disputes currently
  • AS Compliance:  Yes – Since 1987
  • Contact Information:  Employment Development Department | Phone numbers:  English: 1-800-480-3287; and Spanish: 1-866-658-8846 | Website:  https://askedd.edd.ca.gov or https://edd.ca.gov/Disability/SDI_Online.htm

CA Family Rights Act (CFRA)

  • Reference:
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs: CFRA includes a generous pregnancy disability leave (PDL) and other family care and medical leave provisions under The Fair Employment and Housing Act. Requires 1250 hours in the prior 12 months. CFRA is like FMLA, but CFRA also covers domestic partner and domestic partner’s children. An employer can require the employee to use vacation pay, but the employee cannot use sick leave if not for the employee’s own medical condition. Health benefits must be continued during the leave if the employer is part of a group plan.
  • Status:  No lawsuits known to AFA at this time.
  • AS Compliance:  No
  • Contact Information:  Department of Fair Employment and Housing | Mailing Address: 2218 Kausen Drive, Suite 100, Elk Grove, CA 95758 | Phone: (800) 884-1684 | Email:  contact.center@dfeh.ca.gov | Website:  http://www.dfeh.ca.gov/

CA Family School Partnership Act

  • Reference:  CA Labor Code 230.8
  • Rule(s) of Interest to FAs: Employees may take 8 hours/month up to 40 hours/year to attend any day care or K-12 school function that is sponsored, supervised, or approved by the school, school board, or childcare facility. Time loss may be paid out of vacation pay, compensatory time off (CTO), personal time off or unpaid. Attendance Points may not be assessed for using this leave. Applies to parents, grandparents, or guardians with at least seven days’ notice.
  • Status:  No known disputes currently. – AFA encourages eligible and willing California FAs to request time off under this law and then to file a complaint with the state when denied.
  • AS Compliance:  No
  • Contact Information:  CA Dept of Industrial Relations | Phone Numbers: 1-844-619-8786 or SFO 415-703-5300, LAX 213-620-6330 or SAN 619-220-5451 | Email:  DLSE2@Dir.CA.gov | Website:  https://www.dfeh.ca.gov –> Complaints

Filing a Claim with the Appropriate Agency

AFA cannot file claims on behalf of Flight Attendants, but we’re here to assist

AFA does not have the ‘standing’ to file complaints with state or local agencies on behalf of affected employees–even if those employees are AFA Alaska members. However, we are very much interested in guiding and supporting members to file such complaints. Flight Attendants should reach out to their local AFA Benefits Committee representatives to discuss the law in question, and we will refer you to the applicable state agency so you can file a claim. Flight Attendants should copy an AFA rep into any email correspondence with the state.

Helpful tips

When filing a claim, the Flight Attendant will need to provide evidence of the Company’s refusal to comply with the law. Flight Attendants are encouraged to keep a documentation trail and to file timely as there may be filing timelines. We encourage Flight Attendants to tell any state agency representative that Alaska Airlines is knowingly disregarding the law.  AFA is hopeful that the states will act against Alaska Airlines management directly and compel the Company to comply with applicable state laws.   

In the Next Edition (Publishing Monday)

  • WA Long Term Care (Cares Fund)
  • CA 2021 COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave

We Will Never Forget – September 11, 2001

Click here to visit the AFA Never Forget Website

United Flight 175

Robert J. Fangman
Amy N. Jarret
Amy R. King
Kathryn LaBorie
Alfred G. Marchand
Michael C. Tarrou
Alicia N. Titus
Captain: Victor Saracini
First Officer: Michael Horrocks
Customer Service Representatives: Marianne MacFarlane and Jesus Sanchez

United Flight 93

Lorraine G. Bay
Sandra Bradshaw
Wanda A. Green
CeeCee Lyles
Deborah Welsh
Captain: Jason Dahl
First Officer: Leroy Homer

American Flight 11

Barbara Arestegui
Jeffrey Collman
Sara Low
Karen Martin
Kathleen Nicosia
Betty Ong
Jean Roger
Madeline Sweeney
Dianne Snyder
Captain: John Ogonowski
First Officer: Thomas McGuinness
Customer Service Representative: Renee Newell

American Flight 77

Michele Heidenberger
Jennifer Lewis
Kenneth Lewis
Renee May
Captain: Charles Burlingame
First Officer: David Charlebois

MEC Town Hall Video and Q&A Recap – March 3, 2026

The recording of our March 3 MEC Town Hall is now available! Watch the video on the AFA Alaska + Hawaiian YouTube channel using the private link below. Please note that the video is accessible only through the link here and is not publicly posted on our channel. We’ve also put together a summary of […]

Hotel Committee Meeting Recap – March 2026

On Monday, March 9, our AFA Local Hotel Committee Chairpersons met in-person in Seattle 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), Kelly Hepworth (PDX), Hilary Streem (SFO), Brian Sherill (LAX pmAS), and Kanani Vallot […]

Inflight Service Committee Meeting Recap – 1st Quarter 2026

On Thursday, February 26, our AFA Inflight Service Committee Chairpersons met to discuss their ongoing work in representing our Flight Attendants and advocating for improvements in our workplace. Representing you at the meeting were Naomi Parcell (ANC), Ross DeJong (SEA), Todd Horn (PDX), Raymond Ramirez (SFO), Johanna Thomas (LAX pmAS), Gary Manoi (LAX pmHA), Andrew […]

2026 AFA Board of Directors Convention Recap

The 2026 AFA Board of Directors Convention concluded on Wednesday, marking the end of an engaging and productive three days. Delegates participated in a full agenda: hearing from elected officials and union leaders, joining a spirited picketing event at PDX to support Horizon Flight Attendants in their contract fight, honoring the achievements of AFA award recipients, electing […]

Reserve Committee Meeting Recap – 1st Quarter 2026

This message is for pre-merger Alaska Flight Attendants On Thursday, March 5, representatives from our pre-merger Alaska AFA Reserve Committee Chairpersons met to discuss their ongoing work to advocate for Reserve Flight Attendants. Representing you at the meeting were Conner Gallager (SEA), Anthony Eskander (PDX), Meghan Casey (SFO) & MEC Reserve Committee Vice Chairperson—New Hire […]

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 Council 30 ANC Council 35 SFO Council 39 PDX Council 47 LAX (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 Committee 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 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