eMaestro update tonight
There will be an eMaestro outage beginning at 11 pm Pacific Time tonight (Wednesday, January 27th) for a system update. This update should bring the programmed Open Time (OT) trading rules into contractual compliance with the language in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) §12.F [Open Time Trial]. Changes to trading rules will be effective when eMaestro is brought back online.
Pairing codes and trading rules
The new OT system will include codes displayed next to the pairings. The codes will be TO (“Trading down is Open”) / CP (“CouPon Drop”) / DD (“Direct Drop”) / TX (“Trading down is eXcluded”)—or the code may be blank. Each pairing with the code TO, CP or DD on a particular day of departure together make up the Threshold Sequence Number (TSN), which determines if the day is “limited” (closed). Any trip with the TO/CP/DD code may be traded up or down regardless of the number of days as long as the trip exchanged reports on the same day.
Day for day trading!
With this update there will be additional trading capabilities regarding day for day trading, including multiple sequence trades in Open Time! The multiple sequence trading rules are more favorable than the language currently in §12.F [Open Time Trial], which was a pleasant surprise to AFA when discovered earlier this week. Management has agreed to incorporate these multiple sequence trading rules into the OT Trial. Due to the short lead-time, the parties were unable to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to supplement the language of §12.F prior to the programming patch going live. However, we will publish that MOU as soon as possible.
Single or multiple sequence trade: TX or uncoded
If a pairing in Open Time is labeled TX (“Trading down is eXcluded”) or it has a blank designation, then that pairing can be traded for one or more pairings on your line as long as the trips being traded off of your line cover the same dates as the trip being picked up in OT even if there is a gap between the trips being traded off of your line. The trip(s) on your line does not necessarily have to report on the same date of report as the trip in OT as long as the trip(s) being traded off of your line covers the same dates as the trip in OT or more.
Example: Two turns on your line starting on the 1st and 2nd can be traded for a 2-day in OT starting on the 1st that is coded TX and the 1st is “limited” (closed).
Example: A turn starting on the 1st and a 2-day starting on the 3rd on your line can be traded for a 4-day in OT starting on the 1st that is coded TX and the 1st is “limited” (closed)—even though there is a gap between the trips being traded off of your line.
Single sequence trade: TO/CP/DD
No change to current trading rules.
Multiple sequence trade: TO/CP/DD
If a pairing in Open Time is labeled TO/CP/DD, then that pairing can be traded for one or more pairings on your line as long as the trips being traded off of your line cover the same dates as the trip being picked up in OT—even if there is a gap between the trips being traded off of your line; none of the days of departure of the trips being traded off of your line can be “limited” (closed) in OT. Again, the trip(s) on your line does not necessarily have to report on the same date of report as the trip in OT as long as the trip(s) being traded off of your line covers the same dates as the trip in OT or more.
Example: Two turns on your line starting on the 1st and 2nd can be traded for a 2-day in OT starting on the 1st that is coded TO/CP/DD if both the 1st and the 2nd are open.
Example: A turn starting on the 1st and a 2-day starting on the 3rd on your line can be traded for a 4-day in OT starting on the 1st that is coded TO/CP/DD if both the 1st and the 3rd are open—even though there is a gap between the trips being traded off of your line. In this case, it does not matter whether the 2nd and the 4th are “limited” (closed) or open.
* * *
More information can be found in §12.F [Open Time Trial]. Because so much of this is new to everybody, naturally there will be questions. Use your Local Executive Council (LEC) officers or Scheduling Committee members as resources but please be patient while everyone familiarizes themselves with the new rules. We’ll have several weeks to play with the new trading rules prior to March Open Time opening on February 17th for Seattle and February 16th for all other bases. The Open Time Trial as referenced in §12.F.10 will officially commence on those dates.
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow, Stephen Couckuyt; and MEC Scheduling Committee Chairperson Jake Jones
At the January meeting of the Master Executive Council (MEC) earlier this week, your MEC interviewed candidates for the position of MEC Scheduling Committee Vice Chairperson for Pairing Construction, commonly referred to as the AFA Pairing Analyst. In total, four candidates interviewed for the position (one Anchorage-based flight attendant, two Seattle-based flight attendants and one Los Angeles-based flight attendant). The MEC sincerely thanks the candidates for stepping forward. After much discussion, the MEC has appointed Karen Ferrell to the position.
About Karen
Karen has worked for Alaska Airlines for over 37 years in various job capacities. Currently she is an Anchorage-based flight attendant and has been for 17 years. Karen is also the AFA Council 30 Anchorage vice president and Local Executive Council (LEC) co-chair of the Scheduling Committee.
Karen says, “I have always been interested in the scheduling aspect of our job, and before the current system sat with [Anchorage based flight attendant and former AFA line builder] Anita Davis on a few occasions to try to learn and understand what was then ‘line building.’ …Over the last several years, the quality of our pairings has continued to deteriorate. And though I understand there are many variables to consider, it is my hope that there is a solution that will satisfy the Company’s desire to save money AND create a variety of pairings that can satisfy the diverse needs of our work group.”
* * *
The MEC thanks MEC Scheduling Committee Chairperson Jake Jones for continuing to run pairing solutions on behalf of AFA until Karen can be brought up to speed. She is scheduled to attend training at a Jeppesen training facility in Montreal in early April. Congratulations, Karen!
In Solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow, Stephen Couckuyt; MEC Scheduling Committee Chairperson Jake Jones; and AFA Pairing Analyst Karen Ferrell
PBP is 9.3% of 2015 eligible earnings
Congratulations for another generous Performance Based Pay (PBP) payout! The 2015 PBP for most employees—including flight attendants—is 9.3% of eligible earnings, which is the equivalent of nearly five weeks of pay. More information about PBP can be found on Alaska’s World at https://splash.alaskasworld.com/News/2016/01/21_pbp.asp (login required).
PBP has averaged 8.8% of eligible earnings for flight attendants
Flight attendants first received PBP in 2009, which was paid in early 2010 and incorporated into the Collective Bargaining Agreement as part of the 2010 Contract Extension. Flight attendants previously participated in the Variable Pay Plan (VPP), which had a maximum payout of 7.0% of eligible earnings. PBP has averaged 8.8% of eligible earnings over the past seven years that flight attendants have been receiving PBP.
PBP is very competitive when compared to profit sharing plans at other carriers
If you have heard that profit sharing at another carrier is better than our PBP, know this: Profit sharing for line employees at most other carriers has been lucrative only in the last few years. When you consider that PBP has paid out an average of 8.8% of eligible earnings in every year we’ve been on the plan (since 2009), PBP is very competitive when compared with the best of other profit sharing plans in the industry.
* * *
Thank you for all your hard work—now let’s all pull together to achieve the maximum PBP payout in 2016!
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow and Stephen Couckuyt
AFA and Alaska Airlines management have agreed to extend the provisions of 8.S. [Natural Disasters…] to Philadelphia (PHL) due to Winter Storm Jonas.
Currently covered under 8.S. [Natural Disasters…] for Winter Storm Jonas: JFK, EWR, PHL, BWI, IAD and DCA.
Questions? Contact your Local Executive Council officers or Scheduling Committee members.
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow, Stephen Couckuyt; and MEC Scheduling Chairperson Jake Jones
AFA and Alaska Airlines management have agreed to extend the provisions of 8.S. [Natural Disasters…] to the greater New York metro area (EWR & JFK). Crew Scheduling is arranging for all crews either currently in rest or scheduled to overnight in EWR or JFK to be turned out of Newark tonight. The provisions of 8.S. [Natural Disasters…] now include BWI, IAD, DCA, JFK and EWR.
If you have any questions, contact your Local Executive Council officers or Scheduling Committee members.
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow, Stephen Couckuyt; and MEC Scheduling Chairperson Jake Jones
Effective immediately, AFA and Alaska Airlines management have agreed to enact the provisions of Section 8.S. [Natural Disasters…] in order to remove crews laying over in the Washington, DC (DCA and IAD), and Baltimore, MD (BWI), areas due to Winter Storm Jonas 2016.
Crew Scheduling is currently working on contacting and re-routing the affected crews.
If you have any concerns or questions, please contact your LEC president.
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow, Stephen Couckuyt; and MEC Scheduling Chairperson Jake Jones
AFA wants to clear up any confusion regarding the open time trial. CBA §12.F.10. [Trial Period], states that, “Minimum trial period of twelve (12) months from the month of initial implementation (unless canceled earlier pursuant to F.9., above), which will be determined in the Contract Implementation Schedule. The trial period may be extended by mutual agreement.”
AFA and management agreed when all or most programming is updated the trial period will begin. AFA wants the trial period to commence when all contractual open time features are available and programmed.
The purpose of the trial is, “to create a better more equitable trading system that increases Flight Attendants’ flexibility in modifying their schedules and to improve predictability of staffing and limit the impact of sequence drops to OT on reserve coverage.” CBA §12.F.
In order to fulfill the purpose of the trial, the system must be completely programmed allowing the Flight Attendants and management to utilize it under real conditions. “If the trial creates a liability that cannot be supported, either the Association or the Company may decide to end the Open Time Trial prior to twelve months provided the parties have attempted to modify the Threshold Sequence Number pursuant to §12.F.8.” CBA §12.F.9.
During the trial period, AFA will survey Flight Attendants regarding their satisfaction with Open Time trading on a monthly basis per §12.F.8.d.5. The Master Executive Council (MEC) will continuously review all available information—including the survey—in order to determine if the Open Time trial is working for the Association. The voting members of the MEC (the LEC president of each base) will decide on behalf of the Association whether or not to end the Open Time trial pursuant to §12.F.9.
eMaestro is currently being reprogrammed with the correct contractual applications for the Open Time trial. Once the new code has been properly tested and approved, it will go live. Based on the latest estimates, we are anticipating the Open Time trial to officially begin in the next month or so.
If you have comments, concerns or suggestions please contact your LEC president.
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow and Stephen Couckuyt
AFA would like to bring to your attention management’s use of Alaska Listens passenger comments. Inflight management has deemed negative comments “red flags” and has a procedure to address them.
When a red flag comes to management’s attention an Inflight manager will determine its seriousness. If the red flag is deemed to be somewhat benign or general then a base supervisor will email the Flight Attendant and copy in the other base supervisors. The Flight Attendant can contact any supervisor and have the email/Alaska Listens comment read to them over the phone or read it in person. Depending on the number of red flags for the specific Flight Attendant, the supervisor will either shred the document after the conversation or let the Flight Attendant know that s/he will now have a record of discussion (ROD) in her or his file.
A ROD is not considered discipline, but it can lead to discipline if the Flight Attendant acquires more red flags. Management decided that if a Flight Attendant receives three benign/general comments in a six-month period then that Flight Attendant would be referred to their performance supervisor.
If an Alaska Listens comment is deemed serious then the Flight Attendant will likely be referred directly to her or his performance supervisor. Depending on the severity of the allegation, the Flight Attendant could be given a ROD, an oral or written warning, and in rare cases a suspension or termination.
If a Flight Attendant is contacted to speak with management, s/he should ask if the conversation could lead to discipline. If the answer is “yes” or “maybe” (or any other permutation of that sentiment such as “I don’t know”), s/he should request union representation. In all cases s/he should request a union representative prior to writing any statement.
Questions? Contact your Local Executive Council (LEC) officers [ANC 30 | SEA 19 | PDX 39 | LAX 18 | SAN 15] or grievance reps.
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow, Stephen Couckuyt; and MEC Grievance Chairperson Jennifer Wise MacColl and Committee Member Stephanie Adams
December 2015 Junior Assignment
AFA met with Inflight management last week to debrief Junior Assignment over the holidays. AFA focused on the new contractual language and explored why JA went so senior in several bases. It was a very productive meeting, and both parties were left with homework to do with regard to the JA lists. We will have a more complete report out for you once the parties compare notes this week. Be assured AFA is working diligently to ensure contractual compliance and, if appropriate, to achieve the much-improved compensation for JA out of order pursuant to Section 9.D.1.e.
Printed Contract
The “formatted” proofs came back from the printer but were unacceptable. The printer took the 8.5” x 11” document and simply shrank it down to fit into a 5.5” x 8.5” format. This reduced the font to an unreadable size.
We are now in the process of reformatting the document “in house” and expect the document to be sent to the printer next week. The printer will produce another proof and send it back to AFA and management for approval. If all looks good, then it will go to press.
You will also be receiving a durable hardcover for the contract similar to our Flight Attendant Manual but with a thinner spine. The Company is covering the cost of printing and will be distributing the contract per CBA §27.A. [Distribution of the Agreement]. The Company is picking up the cost of producing and distributing the hardcovers as well.
* * *
In solidarity,
Your MEC – Jeffrey Peterson, Brian Palmer, Yvette Gesch, Lisa Pinkston, Laura Masserant, Cathy Gwynn, Sandra Morrow and Stephen Couckuyt
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 135
- 136
- 137
- 138
- 139
- …
- 206
- Next Page »