Questions & Answers
Questions and Answers 41 - 42
Answer:
Our MEC President has approached Northwest Labor Relations several times on these subjects. In what has become a convenient response to most questions posed to management lately, AFA-CWA is being told that Northwest does not have the authority to make any decisions on issues like these, since Delta is now holding the proverbial purse strings. While our MEC will continue to push Northwest management for answers to merger questions like those you pose, we will only be able to negotiate benefits like retirement plan improvements, better health insurance, livable sick leave language and increased vacation days if we maintain union representation at a combined carrier.
If we were to find ourselves without a union and unable to negotiate a combined contract at a merged carrier—including grandfathering or settlement language for something like accrued sick leave—the investment you’ve made in your future, in your health, all of that sick leave bank, will be subject to the surviving management’s executive decision. We would be unable to use these banked hours as leverage of any kind in merger negotiations if we don’t have a union, nor would we be able to craft language that would bring Delta’s policy up to industry standard like our 1,200-hour maximum sick leave accrual. Only with the protection of collective bargaining rights in a merger will we be able to negotiate better working conditions.
The sick leave issue really is a $39,000 question.
Sick time is important to Northwest flight attendants&nmdash;so much so that during contract negotiations, we fought to restore sick credit accrual totals to pre-“white book” numbers, improving the language in Section 15 (Sick Leave) to reflect voter disapproval with TA1’s 850-hour maximum. Some flight attendants have over 1,000 hours accrued because they are lucky enough not to have had to use this benefit. At the top pay step of over $39/hour, that’s worth more than $39K for some flight attendants! In order to protect this valuable benefit, we need to retain our union in a merger by winning a representation election of the combined group of flight attendants.
As for health insurance benefits, our contractually negotiated plan lists specific coverages with BlueCross BlueShield, while Delta employees use UnitedHealth. Any changes or improvements to health care coverage would depend on our ability to negotiate after a merger. If we can’t negotiate, again management will be free to alter its policy at any time without flight attendant input or consent.
Our pensions are protected in a merger. (For detailed answers to previously asked pension questions, please refer to the Q&A page of our website, nwaafa.org.) They are not subject to the Social Security offset that Delta’s plan participants have. What we could do – if we retain our representation in a merger – is negotiate a new combined plan with increased employer contributions for the merged group. Without a union, management may make changes to a defined contribution plan whenever it deems such changes necessary.
The answer to the benefits question you’ve asked is that, without union representation, every benefit – from health insurance to employer 401(k) contributions to sick leave – will be subject to change without notice. Only with the protections of a contract can we have any say in our future in a merger with Delta Air Lines.
Question 42: What ever happened to the “me-too” grievance that was filed after the pilots started getting overtime pay last summer? Would we lose the right to arbitrate that grievance if we lose our union?
Answer:
We’ve attempted to negotiate a resolution to this issue, but those talks went nowhere, so we’ve shifted our focus to the grievance. Northwest management is sticking by its position that the pilots’ pay increases were a “cost neutral” item, received post-bankruptcy because ALPA settled two outstanding grievances of equal value in exchange for overtime pay.
Both AFA-CWA and the IAM dispute management’s formula showing that ALPA did not receive “financial return” during the summer of 2007. A “me-too” grievance was filed by AFA-CWA (and more recently by the IAM), pursuant to Letter of Agreement 29 of our CBA (LOA 29—Conditions and Covenants) and in IAM’s current contract.
The AFA-CWA grievance will now go to arbitration – our MEC is not willing to accept the company’s settlement offers. In return for improvements to our contract, management suggested either outsourcing our international flying or reducing our rest on certain international patterns, two solutions it proffered during grievance hearings. That’s their idea of a “cost neutral” deal for us.
We believe the pilots received monetary value not offered all other work groups who were involved in the $1.126B bankruptcy labor concessions, and have calculated this benefit to be as much as $21M to $22M. We are prepared to pursue this grievance in arbitration, a right we have thanks to a ratified collective bargaining agreement. (We will update you on the arbitration schedule when it is known.) If we lose our contract in a merger because the combined group of flight attendants doesn’t choose union representation, we lose all rights in that contract, including LOA 29.
Posted by Communications on 06/11 at 05:47 PM
.png){kind=small}