Recent Committee Activity

Last updated November 12, 2020

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

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

Subject of Most Recent Discipline

• Theft.  Anything other than an opened/used bottle of water, unused pilot crew meal or purchased food removed from the aircraft will result in termination.  (Temporarily there are COVID-19 exceptions).  
• Sick leave and FMLA abuse—Terminations on the rise due to travel audits among other things.  Anything written in the comments posting of trip trades and personal drops can be seen, even if eventually deleted.  If management determines abuse it results in termination.  
• Timecard fraud—For example: Holding the door open to obtain sit pay.  Management has terminated for this violation.
• Drug/Alcohol violations
• Harassment
• Reserves commuting during reserve availability period even if self-assigned a trip. Management has terminated for this reason several times.
• Social media violations, including “friending” or “following” passengers on social media from information gained from the IMD
• Commuter Violations
  • Flight Attendant was released from deadhead and used D8Y (commuter boarding priority) to travel home from an outstation
  • 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
• Lost IMD or other required items
• Failing to complete CBT—even if FA just forgets to hit the close out x at the top to switch it from in process to complete.

Recent and Upcoming Arbitration/Mediation

Arbitration	July	Contractual Grievance
Arbitration	August	Contractual Grievance
Arbitration	September	Disciplinary Grievance

Recent Arbitration Awards

None

Recent Grievance Settlements

None

Grievances Pending Final Settlement

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.  

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-170-19-Violation of §19.A Investigatory Meetings.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement § 19.A [Grievance Procedures], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about October 29, 2019, at Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD), it conducted an investigatory meeting related to a slide deployment with all Flight Attendants assigned to work flight 623 (IAD-SFO) while they were on duty, without providing adequate opportunity to obtain Union representation in the form of an AFA Grievance Representative, and without providing the option of conducting the meeting on their day off with accompanying pay of four (4.0) TFP.  

Grievances Recently Granted by Management

Grievance 36-99-2-275-20-Violation of §30.A.2 Training Hours.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §30.A.2 [Training:  Hours], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about July 23, 2020, Flight Attendants attending Recurrent Training (RT) in Seattle were released at 5:07pm, seven (7) minutes past the contractual release time of 5:00pm.    

Details:  Flight Attendants who attended in this particular class will receive an additional 1.0 TFP.

Grievance 36-99-2-279-20-Violation of §30.A.2 Training Hours.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §30.A.2 [Training:  Hours], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about August 11, 2020, Flight Attendants attending Recurrent Training (RT) in Long Beach (LGB) were released at 4:03pm, three (3) minutes past the contractual release time of 4:00pm.    

Details:  Flight Attendants who attended in this particular class will receive an additional 1.0 TFP.

Grievances Recently Filed

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

Grievances Recently Filed and Denied

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

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

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

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.:  36-99-2-1-17- 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.:  36-99-2-54-17-Violation of §23.A.1 Flight Attendants Incurring a 3% Fee for Online Payments to COBRA Management Services.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §23.A.1 [Insurance Benefits:  Flight Attendant Insurance Plans], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when for the convenience of the Company it used a third-party vendor to administer collection of healthcare premiums for Flight Attendants on leaves of absence; and the Company allowed their third-party vendor to charge the Flight Attendants a 3% fee for online payments to COBRA Management Services (CMS). 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-65-19-Violation §24.B and Continuing Violation of §28.G.6.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §24.B [General and Miscellaneous:  Flight Attendant and Eligible Dependent(s) Pass and Reduced Fare Privileges] and §28.G.6 (now §28.G.5) [Domiciles], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when its remedy for arbitration award 36-99-2-29-15 moved employees with director titles travel priority above all Alaska Airlines Flight Attendants and their immediate families when Flight Attendants should be allowed the same pass and reduced fare privilege afforded other Alaska Airlines employees.  

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-151-19-Violation §21.J Ground Delay Pay.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §21.J [Compensation:  Block and Ground Delays], past practice and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when it failed to pay Flight Attendants ground delay pay when there is a delay of an aircraft that delays the scheduled departure time of a Flight Attendant’s subsequent flights of the sequence by eleven minutes (:11) or more and the actual ground time exceeds the scheduled ground time by eleven minutes (:11).   

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

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-165-19- 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.  

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

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

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-126-20-Violation of §30.A.2 Training Hours.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §30.A.2 [Training:  Hours], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about February 18, 2020, Flight Attendants attending Recurrent Training (RT) in SEA were checked in at approximately 7:25am, thirty-five (35) minutes prior to the beginning of RT and released at 5:00pm, which kept them in RT for over the contractually allowed time of eight (8) hours.   

Grievance No.:  36-99-2-200-20-Violation of §25.C.1 Failure to Include ASHSC in Safety Meeting.  This grievance alleges the Company’s violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement §25.C.1 [Air Safety Health and Security: Safety Meetings], past practice, and all related sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when on or about April 3, 2020, it failed to include the Air Safety, Health and Security Committee (ASHSC) in a meeting to discuss passengers who were scheduled to travel on Alaska flights after disembarking from a cruise ship which had suffered an outbreak of COVID-19. The company instead opted to brief AFA about the issue after the meeting and decision was made about how to proceed. 

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

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