Q:     With regard to Registered Air Commuters having a commuter priority, does this extend to the jumpseat?

A:     No, the commuter priority is only for cabin seating.

“Registered Air Commuters” will be given boarding priority over Company employees (and dependents) on pleasure travel and over all employees of other airlines on Alaska Airlines mainline flights and on other airlines if applicable in accordance with current Company policy at the time of the commute.  – JCBA §28.G.5 [Domiciles: Commuter Policy]

Commuters do not receive preferential priority for the jumpseat.

Although the jumpseat priority is technically Company policy and therefore subject to management discretion, AFA obviously takes a very, very active interest in the jumpseat priority. There is no intent to change current practice for jumpseat priority: seniority until D-30, at which point it converts to first-come, first-served.

Q:     When will pmAS FAs see the change in their hire dates for step rate increases?

A:     Step rate increases are based on Occupational Seniority date, which is the date an employee is placed on the Company payroll as a FA and going forward will now include credit for time spent in Initial Training. Adjustments to pmAS Occupational Seniority dates will occur as soon as practicable after ratification, and the new Occupational Seniority date will be retroactive to January 1, 2018 for the purposes of pay.

Q:     Can you tell me when the current contracts and pay scales expire for United (UA), Southwest (WN), American (AA) and Delta (DL)?

A:     Yes.

• AFA United: CBA amendable August 2020.
• TWU Southwest: CBA amendable October 2018.  
• APFA American: CBA amendable December 2019.
• Delta FAs are currently non-union and therefore not covered under a collective bargaining agreement, so their pay and work rules can be changed at any time.  

Click here for FA Industry Payscale Comparisons in TFP >

Click here for FA Industry Payscale Comparisons in Block-Hours >

Q:     At one point management was leading a focus group to start a mentorship program to help with training a consistent service for our new hires. It seems like this would be a perfect time to implement such a program. Is this kind of program even being talked about anymore?

A:    Management presented a proposal for a trial mentorship program to the MEC for consideration back in 2016 (see “Mentorship Program Update – November 2016”). The MEC rejected the proposal for a variety of reasons, including troubling shortcomings in terms of scheduling requirements and pay.

Management did not address the Mentorship Program with the JNC in these negotiations. The MEC remains open to conversation about establishing a Mentorship Program if the timing is right and the program is deemed to be a benefit to the membership as a whole.

Q:     The full TA we are reading is comprehensive, correct? What I mean is this the TA for both of us? There isn’t a portion that applies to VX we at AS are not seeing?

A:     Correct. All the documents that comprise the Merger Agreement ( the global document) have been released in full text. There are no other agreements that have not been released other than that management has agreed to pay for some transition-related training (e.g. PBS). The parties will finalize that agreement this week.

p.s. The VX work rules, which are currently neither considered a ‘contract’ nor addressable by the grievance procedure, would be considered ‘contractual’ and therefore enforceable if the TA is ratified. At that point, the work rules would be ‘frozen’ and could not be further amended except by mutual agreement of the parties.

Q:     When the TA is approved, will service and inflight labor (amount of work performed) be matched to that of AS? For example, LAX SFO is a full beverage service for the entire cabin, whereas AS, correct me if I’m wrong, has a reduced beverage service. Will the VX service be adjusted to match? Equal work for equal pay?

A:     Not immediately. Flight Attendant service duties are determined at management’s discretion, so this is not a contractual issue. We know that management will align the product offerings and service flow, but it will not occur at date of ratification. Management has indicated to AFA that the bulk of service alignment is anticipated to occur this fall.

Q:     Why can’t we fight for more Positive Space (PST) tickets? We use those more frequently and we don’t seem to be getting them as often.  Can they be added to the contract?

A:     Pass travel is a Company benefit and therefore management discretion. The only contractual language we have regarding discretionary (i.e. for pleasure) pass travel is that FAs receive the same pass privileges as other employees and that you may continue to have pass travel privileges under certain conditions while on leaves of absence. Management considers pass travel to be a management’s rights issue, so it is extremely unlikely that AFA will be able to negotiate PST tickets.

Q:     Why wasn’t vacation and sick leave counting towards the 480 for paid vacation accrual negotiated and improved?

A:     Improving the 480 was definitely on the table. The JNC tried very hard to recapture vacation counting towards the 480 for purposes of vacation accrual in JCBA negotiations, but management was adamantly opposed. It was one of the very last items that the JNC very reluctantly took off the table at the end in order to reach a TA. That strategic decision was made only after considering all factors and in consultation with the MEC.

Although this does not fix the “hard 480” for vacation, the JNC was able to achieve tangential improvements to vacation:

• Elimination of the 1/12 reduction to vacation accrual when there is no paid time in a month (meaning no more  ‘double jeopardy’ of the “hard 480” and the 1/12 reduction);
• Paid and unpaid vacation and Longevity PTO applies towards achieving the new Productivity Premium Program (PPP); and
• Paid and unpaid vacation and Longevity PTO entitlement can all be used for minimum coordination under §15.M.2 for purposes of retaining medical insurance at the active employee rates. This “vacation coordination bank” includes one’s full possible vacation entitlement per §23.B.1.c even if the 480 requirements are not achieved in the previous year.

Based on management’s approach to the 480 in JCBA negotiations, it seems extremely unlikely that management’s position on the 480 would change in regular Section 6 negotiations.

Q:     What is the difference between merger negotiations and Section 6 negotiations?

A:     The Railway Labor Act (RLA) sets out the provisions governing Section 6 negotiations*. The steps involving direct negotiations, oversight by the National Mediation Boards (NMB), mediation, etc are set in the provisions of the law:

• An RLA labor group’s contract has an amendable date (versus an expiration date);
• The NMB controls the timetable if the parties enter mediation; and
• If granted a proffer of arbitration, both labor and management can engage in self help remedies.

In Section 6 negotiations, the entire contract is open and management is free to ask for “productivity gains,” which is usually what we would call “concessions.”  It is not unusual to take years to reach a tentative agreement under the Section 6 negotiations process.

Unlike Section 6 negotiations, our contract is not amendable in merger negotiations. Merger negotiations normally involve a more limited scope of items focused on the transitions needed for the merger. However, the JNC sought to achieve improvements for FAs from both carriers, so we were put in the position of reaching a “mid-term” agreement with a duration that extends beyond the current contract (i.e. JCBA amendable in 2021 vs. current CBA amendable in 2019) in order to do so.

* The phrase “Section 6 negotiations” comes from where the provisions covering negotiations under the RLA was historically located: in Section 6. Although the RLA has now been incorporated into the broader United States Code of federal statutes, the name stuck.