COVID-19 Vaccination Attestation Concerns

August 3, 2021 20:00

COVID-19 Vaccination Attestation Concerns

Master Executive Council (MEC), Grievance Committee

Several members have reached out to AFA regarding management’s recent email titled, “Vaccination Attestation and Masking policy changes.” Some of the questions being asked: Can management ask about our vaccination status? Is it a violation of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to ask about our vaccination status? What is AFA doing about it?

Can Alaska Airlines (a private employer) ask about employees’ vaccination status?

In a nutshell, yes. Given the contagiousness and deadliness of the COVID-19 virus and its more contagious Delta variant, companies have a legitimate business reason to inquire about an employee’s vaccination status. An employer can ask employees about their vaccination status and/or for proof of vaccination provided it does not make medical inquiries that could prompt discussion about disability-related information, which would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Employers have a duty of care under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) to provide a safe workplace for employees. Under this duty of care an employer can ask employees about their vaccination status and/or for proof of vaccination, subject to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidelines. If an employee is unable or unwilling to disclose their vaccination status and/or to provide proof of vaccination, the employer is allowed to enforce workplace safety policies such as mask wearing and/or social distancing. Management has the discretion to treat such employees the same way as employees who refuse to be vaccinated on non-medical or non-religious grounds.

Identifying employees who are exempt from mask requirements while in Company buildings with tags or stickers is not a discriminatory practice under EEOC guidelines. Tags or stickers will not be actively distributed to crewmembers because mask requirement remain in place at airports and on aircraft, and there is no exemption to those requirements for crewmembers.

At this point, Alaska Airlines is not requiring proof of vaccination status, but AFA believes it would behoove one to answer honestly since it appears the Company has the legal right to request such proof. If you have concerns about disclosing your status, AFA recommends selecting the opt-out response: “I decline to answer.”

Is it a violation of HIPAA for an employer to ask employees about their vaccination status?

HIPAA applies to covered entities such as healthcare providers and the like. HIPAA does not apply to most (non-healthcare) employers, so it is not a violation for Alaska Airlines to ask its employees about their vaccination status. HIPPA is designed to keep your medical information safe from being shared with third parties. In other words, management can ask you about your vaccination status, but cannot contact your doctor or healthcare provider to ask about your status. Even so, management will safeguard the records of employee attestations by sharing the information only with Human Resources and those deemed necessary to know in limited circumstances and by storing the data in a separate location from personnel records.

What is AFA doing about it?

Management’s requirement for employees to complete a vaccination attestation is not a contractual violation under our Collective Bargaining Agreement, nor does such requirement appear to be a violation of religious freedoms, civil liberties, or any other federal laws. The “requirement” to complete the attestation is more like a strongly encouraged request because management has indicated to AFA that employees who do not fill out the form will not be disciplined at this time, so we do not anticipate any resulting disciplinary grievances. Finally, there is an opt-out response available for any who remain concerned about disclosing their vaccination status: “I decline to answer.”

AFA Alaska Update – July 30, 2021

July 30, 2021 12:00

In This Edition

Protect Our Contract – Don’t Perform Duties Belonging to Other Work Groups
Help End Human Trafficking: Take the Survey

Protect Our Contract – Don’t Perform Duties Belonging to Other Work Groups

Grievance Committee

Over the course of many decades, all of us have worked hard to improve our working conditions and strengthen our collective bargaining agreement (CBA). These improvements have been achieved through several avenues including demonstrating our solidarity during contract negotiations, lobbying management to make changes that benefit our profession, and rigorously enforcing the contractual language that we have already achieved. It is the responsibility of each of us to continue to protect and defend our contract and hold management accountable for what has been agreed upon by both our Flight Attendants and the Company.

Recently, management has made it known that they are having a particularly difficult time recruiting and retaining frontline employees in various locations throughout the route network. This includes staff who are directly employed by the company, those who are employed by subsidiaries of the company (e.g., McGee Air Services), and contract vendors who provide above- and/or below-the-wing services at various stations. The situation has caused a noticeable impact to the Company’s operations and has resulted in some on-the-ground functions being adjusted or modified due to staffing in some situations.

We all know that Alaska Airlines focuses on hiring Flight Attendants who exhibit kindness and demonstrate a willingness to help. Because these traits are such a pervasive part of our culture, it may be tempting to want to jump in and assist our coworkers from other work groups when we see that they are short staffed. Unfortunately, this causes more harm than good for several reasons.

As previously mentioned, it is up to each of us to protect the provisions of our collective bargaining agreement. Section 24.D of the CBA says in part: “A Flight Attendant will not be required to perform work normally assigned to a cleaner, provisioner, ramp or operations agent.” Just as we expect other work groups to honor our contractual language by not performing Flight Attendant duties and responsibilities, it is similarly important that we respect other work groups and their normally assigned scope of work as well. Doing so protects the security of both Flight Attendant jobs and the jobs of our coworkers in other departments.

Customer service, ramp, mechanics, pilots, fleet service, catering, and other work groups receive specific training to perform their duties that Flight Attendants do not have. We must allow our colleagues to do the work that they have been trained to do to ensure that it is done in compliance with applicable regulations and to company standards. If there are concerns with staffing in a particular department, management needs to receive the corresponding reports of flight delays, complaints from passengers, and performance audit results. These are all indicators that management uses to adjust and ensure that our colleagues in other departments have the support that they need. If this data is skewed to show that no problems exist, then no changes will made by management to ensure proper staffing and service levels.

The best way that Flight Attendants can show support for other work groups who might be experiencing short staffing is by reporting the issue to ensure that it gets attention from the right levels of management. This can be accomplished by submitting a Flight Attendant Irregularity Report (FAIR) detailing the date, flight number, and specifics of the situation (e.g., areas that were skipped/missed, etc.).

Questions?

If you have any questions, please contact your Local Grievance Committee.

Help End Human Trafficking: Take the Survey

AFA International

AFA is partnering with United Against Slavery in a global effort to end the scourge of human trafficking. As Flight Attendants and aviation’s first responders, we are uniquely positioned to identify human traffickers and assist their victims.

Human trafficking is a billion-dollar business, but Flight Attendants can be 100,000 Eyes in the Skies to recognize and report it. We can be the ones to make the difference.

Historical efforts to gather and understand information to implement effective solutions for this crime have been a challenge and success seemed unattainable. Why? They have not involved collecting the knowledge that only those on the frontlines have.

Click here to take the survey >

Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 1

July 28, 2021 09:00

Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 1

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

This is the first 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.

Background

Management alleges that certain state and local laws do not apply to flight crew

Airlines For America (A4A) is an American trade association and lobbying group representing major North American air carriers such as Alaska Airlines. A4A and/or Alaska Airlines management has taken the position that the Railway Labor Act (RLA) preempts (i.e., invalidates) certain state and local laws that in its opinion overlaps with, conflicts with or complicates various benefits and provisions provided for in collective bargaining agreements negotiated with labor unions representing flight crew. Simply stated, A4A and Alaska Airlines management are making legal arguments in several jurisdictions (e.g., WA, CA, MA and NY) that specific state and local laws do not apply to Flight Attendants and pilots. However, it is notable that management has been honoring the same laws for ground employees–even if they are also covered by contracts negotiated with their respective labor unions and under the RLA.

Management believes that honoring various local laws for flight crew would ultimately lead to competitive disadvantage and tough business decisions in response

Why? Based on our interactions with management, here are some of the reasons offered by management to justify denying flight crew access to various benefits and protections provided for under what management characterizes as a “patchwork quilt” of state and local laws:

Administratively burdensome to honor because of the difficulties in tracking the sheer number of such laws and complying with their complexities.
Some laws may overlap with and/or conflict with one another and may also apply only conditionally based on the real-time location of an individual crewmember.
Significant challenges with overlaying these laws on top of the provisions of existing collective bargaining agreements (e.g., clock hours versus block hours versus TFP; meal, rest break and wage reporting requirements).
Honoring such laws for flight crew would create significant operational and financial liabilities for the Company and thereby result in untenable competitive disadvantage. This in turn could lead management to reevaluate the viability of existing crew domiciles in problematic locations and to make tough business decisions about the location of crew domiciles going forward. Management has cautioned your union leadership to beware of the potential for such unintended and undesirable consequences as these would likely be perceived by you as unacceptably disruptive and universally unpopular.

AFA is closely following the preemption litigations with great interest

AFA is closely following the preemption litigations with great interest because the outcomes affect our members at various airlines. However, the legal arguments themselves are generally outside of AFA’s “jurisdiction” in the sense that the Association’s sole duty is to act as the agent for members of the collective bargaining unit under the RLA and to fairly represent them. AFA neither has an obligation to directly participate in the preemption disputes nor has the resources to broadly do so, but nonetheless we have very strategically chosen to intervene in some of the preemption litigations over the past ten years. Several current and former MEC officers and chairpersons have been directly involved in a few cases as complainants, subject matter experts and/or deposed witnesses.

Recent Cases

Washington Family Care Act: Alaska Airlines v. Schurke (WA L&I)

In approximately 2012, Alaska Airlines sued the State of Washington regarding provisions of the Washington Family Care Act (WFCA), alleging that the WFCA does not apply to Washington-domiciled Flight Attendants. AFA intervened as a defendant in the suit, as this was a case of first impression, and we wanted our interests protected in an area of law not yet addressed.

The case was initially decided in favor of the State of Washington and AFA. Alaska Airlines appealed the case to the US Court of Appeals for the 9^th Circuit. A panel of three justices decided in Alaska Airlines’ favor. At that point, the State of Washington and AFA requested an en banc opinion, with all justices making a decision.

In August 2018, the en banc opinion ruled in favor of the State of Washington and AFA. Alaska Airlines then filed an appeal with the United States Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court did not grant the writ of certiori, which means it did not accept the case, and the 9^th Circuit ruling stands in favor of the State of Washington and AFA.

The case went back to a state administrative hearing, and the administrative law judge ruled for the State of Washington and AFA. Alaska Airlines then appealed this ruling. We are currently awaiting a ruling on the appellate case, which hopefully will be issued within the next few months. In the meantime, Alaska Airlines is still not honoring this law.

Washington Paid Sick Leave: A4A v. WA L&I and Joel Sacks

In early 2018, AFA demanded that Alaska Airlines comply with a new State of Washington law: Washington Paid Sick Leave (WPSL) law. Alaska’s response to AFA’s formal demand was to have A4A file suit against the State of Washington on behalf of all airlines it represents. Again, AFA was an intervenor in this lawsuit. The State of Washington and AFA won this suit in a summary judgment motion; A4A appealed the ruling.

On November 17, 2020, the parties argued in front of the US Court of Appeals for the 9^th Circuit, and a decision was returned very recently that ruled in favor of the State of Washington and AFA. At this juncture, AFA has every reason to believe that A4A will attempt an appeal with the US Supreme Court. In the meantime, Alaska Airlines is still not complying with the law.

California overtime, meal & rest breaks, and wage statement laws: Bernstein v. Virgin America

In 2018, a California state court ruled in favor of Virgin America Flight Attendants, which resulted in an initial award of just under $78 million when factoring in legal fees and other costs. Alaska Airlines appealed this judgment, and it currently remains in the appeal process.

California wage statement laws: Gunther v. Alaska Air Group Inc.

In May 2019, a California state court ruled in favor of an Alaska Airlines Flight Attendant who brought her own wage statement non-compliance lawsuit against Alaska Air Group. The court ruled against Alaska Airlines on behalf of all California-domiciled Flight Attendants and issued an award of $25 million. Seventy-five percent of the award is to be paid to the State of California, and the remaining twenty-five percent of the award is to be paid to California-domiciled Flight Attendants with no more than $4,000 to each Flight Attendant. Alaska Airlines also appealed this judgment, and it is presently still in the appeals process.

New and Pre-Existing Laws Denied

In response to litigation of the Washington State leave laws initiated directly by Alaska Airlines management or indirectly via Airlines for America (A4A), management has simply denied flight crew access to the benefits of new laws. Management also retracted a Flight Attendant’s ability to use several state laws already existing at the time litigation was filed. One example of such retraction is the California Family School Partnership Act, which management allowed California-domiciled Flight Attendants to use for many years prior.

Next Up (in “Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 2”)

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

Blue Cross Blue Shield Class Action Settlement

June 7, 2021 09:00

Blue Cross Blue Shield Class Action Settlement

Master Executive Council (MEC)

Legal Disclaimer

The following information is being provided as a courtesy to our members because enrollment in some of the Company-provided healthcare plans subject to specific provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement may have made you eligible for a class action settlement. However, AFA is neither a party to the class action nor has been involved in the settlement agreement discussions. If you have specific questions or concerns about the terms of the class action settlement, then you need to consult with the Claims Administrator or Co-Lead Counsel as described in the Blue Cross Blue Shield Settlement or with your own attorney.

Class Action Settlement is Legitimate

Many Flight Attendants have received notice via USPS or email about a class action settlement involving the Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) companies, including Premera Blue Cross. For reasons unknown, the delivery of the notices has been all over the map in terms of timing, and many Flight Attendants have reported that they have not received any notice whatsoever. Regardless, these notices are legitimate, and you may be eligible for a settlement payment pursuant to this cause of action if you enrolled in the Company-funded traditional or high-deductible PPO healthcare plans administered by Premera Blue Cross during the eligibility period (see “Settlement Details” below).

Alaskasworld Notice Posted

AFA requested that management post a notice to employees on Alaskasworld (AW), and management agreed to do so. See AW “For your information: Blue Cross Blue Shield notices” (May 27, 2021) for the article (AAG SSO required).

Settlement Details

Website: http://www.BCBSsettlement.com
Alaska Airlines employees would potentially belong to the “self-funded employees” category under “self-funded accounts”
Self-funded net settlement fund: 6.5% of the estimated $1.9 billion “net settlement fund” = ~$120 million.
Self-funded eligibility period: September 1, 2015 – October 16, 2020
Default payment option for employees is a portion of total administrative fees paid during the eligibility period: 18% for “single coverage” (employee only) and 25% for “family coverage (employee + spouse or employee + family), with the remainder going to the employer. In our opinion, this is a favorable calculation relative to the proportion of our contribution rate compared to the Company’s actual cost for healthcare.
Opt-out or objection deadline is July 28, 2021
You must submit a claim in order to be eligible to receive a payment.
Claim deadline is November 5, 2021
Minimum payment is $5

Minimum Payment

In our estimation, the minimum payment of $5 is likely to exclude any Alaska employees from receiving a payout under this settlement. However, there really is no way to know for certain. We are recommending that all eligible Flight Attendants who are interested in participating in the terms of the settlement should submit a claim by November 5, 2021.

Premera Blue Cross Third Party Administrative (TPA) Fees

This information is not necessary to know in order to submit a claim. However, some Flight Attendants have expressed an interest in potentially submitting for an alternative payment option instead of the default 18% for single coverage and 25% for family coverage. Some of those Flight Attendants have inquired about the third party administrative (TPA) fee paid to Premera Blue Cross by the Company for each enrolled employee on a monthly basis during the eligibility period.

Please refer to the emailed version of this communication for the TPA fees paid per employee (enrolled) per month (PEPM).

Questions?

Website: www.BCBSsettlement.com
Email: info@BCBSsettlement.com
Call: (888) 681-1142
Write to: Blue Cross Blue Shield Settlement c/o JND Legal Administration, PO Box 91390, Seattle, WA 98111

If you have questions specifically for AFA, contact your LEC president.

AFA Alaska Update – May 28, 2021

May 28, 2021 12:00

In This Edition

Grievance Committee Update
Join the Delta AFA Campaign
UNCF Commitment Aircraft
Mental Health Awareness Month

Grievance Committee Update

Grievance Committee

Our Grievance Committee has been very hard at work ensuring disciplinary due process and contractual compliance on your behalf. The collective bargaining agreement (CBA) requires a minimum of 13 arbitration dates yearly to dispute discipline/termination cases and contractual issues. AFA typically prioritizes termination cases 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 the 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. There is no middle ground or progressive discipline for certain violations. 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.

For Your Information – Block2Block Team Messaging

Everything that Flight Attendants and other employees type in the team messaging feature of Block2Block is recorded, saved, and regularly reviewed by management. Anyone in the company who has access to the system can log on to a flight and use the system to communicate or just see what is being said. Also, if they choose, they can go back and review conversations from past flights.

Subjects of Most Recent Discipline

Sick leave and FMLA abuse—terminations on the rise due to travel audits among other things. Anything written in the advertising comments on trip trades and personal drops can be seen, even if later deleted. Also, recorded telephone conversations with Crew Scheduling can be referenced for use by management in discipline. If management determines abuse it results in termination. The Company will be looking at sick leave patterns around holidays as well. This means, for example, if a Flight Attendant has called in sick for 3 of the last 3 Mother’s Days, s/he may be called in for a sick leave abuse meeting.
Timecard fraud—for example: delaying boarding door closure to obtain sit pay. Management has terminated for this violation.
Drug/alcohol violations
Theft. Anything other than an opened/used bottle of water, unused pilot crew meal or purchased food removed from the aircraft will result in termination.
Harassment and discrimination
Reserve Flight Attendants commuting during the reserve availability period (RAP) even if self-assigned a trip and/or not being in base for the entirety of the RAP (except as provided for in §11.C.5 on the last day of the block). Management has terminated for commuting during the RAP several times.
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 reserve Flight Attendants are in base for their full RAP, and if not, it typically results in termination.
Social media violations including sending friend or follow requests to passengers on social media based on information gained from Block2Block. Also, postings which can be deemed harassing or discriminatory typically result in discipline ranging from written warning to termination.
Lost IMD or other required items
Failing to complete CBT—even if Flight Attendant 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 and/or issued discipline.

Recent Arbitration/Mediation

Arbitration	October	Contractual Grievance
Arbitration	November	Contractual Grievance
Arbitration	December	Contractual Grievance
Arbitration	January	Disciplinary Grievance

Recent Arbitration Awards

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-29-20-Violation of §30.C.4 Computer Based Training (CBT). The Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement [Training], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about January 21, 2020, it significantly increased the number of evaluated drills conducted during recurrent training (RT) and considerably changed the requirements to demonstrate proficiency and pass said drills. To pass all 36 drills with the required perfect score, the Company published 39 videos for Flight Attendant viewing with total watch time of 39 minutes and 40 seconds, none of which Flight Attendants were compensated for watching.

Details: Unfortunately, the arbitrator found in favor of the Company. The arbitrator did recognize the merits of the Union’s case; however, the CBA did not provide for the decision for which we hoped.

Recent Grievance Settlements

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-45-17-Violation of §10.S Pre-Cancellation and Schedule Changes. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §10.S [Scheduling: Pre-Cancellation], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it altered Flight Attendant schedules due to a schedule change/flight retiming using inapplicable Pre-Cancellation language without prior notice to or approval from AFA.

Details: All pre-cancellations, retimes, flight routing changes and aircraft downgrades that occur in advance of the day of departure of a sequence will be handled under §10.S [Pre-Cancellations] beginning Tuesday, June 1, 2021, at 12:01 AM Pacific Time. Click here to read the settlement agreement.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-144-19-Violation §13.D.1 Uniform Allotment and Optional Pieces. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §13.D.1 [Uniforms: Uniform Allotment/Credits], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it refused to give Flight Attendants the ability to purchase Luly Yang inspired by Alaska Airlines optional uniform pieces (which are or will be available for purchase at the Alaska Airlines Company store) with their contractual uniform allotted funds.

Details: The Company is not obligated to sell Luly Yang items at the Company Store; however, if it does, all Luly Yang items will be sold at cost to all Alaska Airlines Flight Attendants. Click here to read the settlement agreement.

Grievance No.: 36-99-2-165-19- Violation of Vacation Trading Past Practice. This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement § 14 [Vacation], an established past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it violated an established past practice for a real-time, electronic vacation trading system and the subsequent failure of that system to allow SEA-based Flight Attendants to access and trade vacation at the established start time.

Details: On or about October 28, 2019, the Company’s Flight Attendant vacation trading system went down for 20 minutes affecting many Flight Attendants’ ability to trade their vacation. Approximately 57 Flight Attendants contacted AFA due to the outage. The Company agreed to pay each of those 57 Flight Attendants 1.0 TFP no later than their March 19, 2021, paycheck. Click here to read the settlement agreement.

Grievances Recently Filed and Denied

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.

More Information

For more information, including the status of previously filed grievances, please visit the Grievance Committee Activity Page.

Questions?

Please contact your Local Grievance Committee if you have any questions about the Grievance Committee update.

Join the Delta AFA Campaign

AFA International

Volunteer Delta Air Lines Flight Attendants have been actively working to organize and build their Union and AFA continues to support them in their efforts. Activities are continuing to ramp up and the AFA organizing team is seeking Flight Attendants from Alaska and other AFA airlines who would like to get involved. If you have personal connections with Delta Flight Attendants, commute or travel regularly on Delta, or are interested in supporting the organizing effort, please take a moment to complete the online contact form or scan the QR code to the right.

Want to Know More?

You can read more about the Delta AFA organizing campaign at https://www.deltaafa.org.

UNCF Commitment Aircraft

Human Rights Committee

On April 26, 2021, Alaska Airlines proudly received its newest livery, an aircraft that symbolizes the Company’s support for education and equity – called “Our Commitment.” This aircraft was inspired and designed in partnership with the Air Group Black Employees (ABEA) business resource group and others. The profiles on the side of the aircraft are 14 children and grandchildren of Alaska’s employees. Located at the L/R1 doors are two inspirational quotes: “The time is always right to do what is right,” (Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) and “Education is the most powerful weapon we can use to change the world” (Nelson Mandela).

Alaska’s partnership with the United Negro College Fund (UNCF) began in 1991. Over the years, Alaska has supported UNCF’s fundraising efforts through donating tickets and event sponsorship. In 2017, UNCF became a LIFT Miles partner enabling students to attend college tours and travel back and forth during school semesters at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). This is like other partnerships and sponsorships the Company presently has with many colleges and universities throughout the route network.

As this aircraft travels around our system, it represents Alaska’s commitment to promote equality and education. It encourages us as an airline to do the right thing by amplifying the conversation around education and equity.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please reach out to your Local Human Rights Committee.

Mental Health Awareness Month

Employee Assistance Program (EAP)/Professional Standards Committee

If you have a mental health condition, you’re not alone. One in 5 American adults experiences some form of mental illness in any given year. And across the population, 1 in every 20 adults is living with a serious mental health condition such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or long-term recurring major depression. Unfortunately, many people don’t seek treatment or remain unaware that their symptoms could be connected to a mental health condition. Trying to tell the difference between what expected behaviors are and what might be signs of a mental illness isn’t always easy. Each illness has its own symptoms, but common signs of mental illness in adults and adolescents can include the following:

Excessive worrying or fear
Feeling excessively sad or low
Confused thinking or problems concentrating and learning
Extreme mood changes, including uncontrollable “highs” or feelings of euphoria
Prolonged or strong feelings of irritability or anger
Avoiding friends and social activities
Difficulties understanding or relating to other people
Changes in sleeping habits or feeling tired and low energy
Changes in eating habits such as increased hunger or lack of appetite
Changes in sex drive
Difficulty perceiving reality (delusions or hallucinations, in which a person experiences and senses things that don’t exist in objective reality)
Inability to perceive changes in one’s own feelings, behavior, or personality (“lack of insight” or anosognosia)
Overuse of substances like alcohol or drugs
Multiple physical ailments without obvious causes (such as headaches, stomach aches, vague and ongoing “aches and pains”)
Thinking about suicide
Inability to carry out daily activities or handle daily problems and stress
An intense fear of weight gain or concern with appearance

If you’re concerned about any of these signs either in yourself, a love one or a flying partner, please reach out to your AFA EAP Committee for confidential support and assistance. Call (949) 470-0493 or locate your local AFA EAP Committee Members at https://afaalaska.org/eap.

COVID-19 Vaccination Attestation Concerns

Can Alaska Airlines (a private employer) ask about employees’ vaccination status?

Is it a violation of HIPAA for an employer to ask employees about their vaccination status?

What is AFA doing about it?

In This Edition

Protect Our Contract – Don’t Perform Duties Belonging to Other Work Groups

Questions?

Help End Human Trafficking: Take the Survey

Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 1

Background

Management alleges that certain state and local laws do not apply to flight crew

Management believes that honoring various local laws for flight crew would ultimately lead to competitive disadvantage and tough business decisions in response

AFA is closely following the preemption litigations with great interest

Recent Cases

Washington Family Care Act: Alaska Airlines v. Schurke (WA L&I)

Washington Paid Sick Leave: A4A v. WA L&I and Joel Sacks

California overtime, meal & rest breaks, and wage statement laws: Bernstein v. Virgin America

California wage statement laws: Gunther v. Alaska Air Group Inc.

New and Pre-Existing Laws Denied

Next Up (in “Management vs. State and Local Laws – Part 2”)

Blue Cross Blue Shield Class Action Settlement

Legal Disclaimer

Class Action Settlement is Legitimate

Alaskasworld Notice Posted

Settlement Details

Minimum Payment

Premera Blue Cross Third Party Administrative (TPA) Fees

Questions?

In This Edition

Grievance Committee Update

For Your Information – Block2Block Team Messaging

Subjects of Most Recent Discipline

Recent Arbitration/Mediation

Recent Arbitration Awards

Recent Grievance Settlements

Grievances Recently Filed and Denied

More Information

Questions?

Join the Delta AFA Campaign

Want to Know More?

UNCF Commitment Aircraft

Questions?

Mental Health Awareness Month

Recent Posts

Local Councils

Master Executive Council

Negotiations

Contract

Committees

News By Month

News By Category

Want To Stay In The Loop?

Connect With AFA