FRH – 12.04.14

 

---

FACT Rep Update – December 4, 2015
Flight Attendant Communications Team

 

FACT:  Arbitration began Wednesday, December 3rd in Washington, D.C .  APFA communications has been live tweeting the arbitration testimony at @APFAunity.  Click here to read the tweets as posted to the APFA Facebook page.  Transcripts from the entire hearing will be posted to APFA’s web site as soon as they become available. 

FACT:  Under the NPA, Arbitration has three (3) parameters which must be met by the arbitrators per the Negotiations Protocol Agreement (NPA): 

• must be equal to “market-based” in the aggregate; and
• as applied to LAA Flight Attendants, have a total economic value greater than the CLA; and
• as applied to LUS Flight Attendants, have a total economic value greater than the “red book.”

In order for the JNC to meet those parameters the wage table in the APFA’s arbitration proposal is based on the following three criteria:

1. Meeting the $112 million average annual increase to the combined LAA/LUS contracts’ value.
2. Fixing the Step 6 rates to ensure that DOS rates are above current LAA/LUS rates.
3. Maintaining out-year pay increases achieved in the T/A.

The methodology used by the JNC to achieve parity while meeting the three parameters of arbitration was as follows:

1. Pay steps 1-12 are based on a split between T/A pay rates and current pay rates. They are the better of LAA/LUS current pay per step (except for Step 6).
2. Top of scale 13-year wage rate is based on the highest amount achievable to meet $112 million average annual increase in total contract value.  
3. Goal of being above current pay rates (better of LAA and LUS at each pay step).

FACT or fiction

Q:  Why is APFA presenting less than the value of the T/A in arbitration?

A:  The rejected T/A, which had an average annual value of $193 million over the combined current contracts, will be submitted as evidence. However, since it exceeds the arbitration parameters for market-based in the aggregate ($112 million annually over the value of the combined contracts), APFA is prohibited from submitting it as its proposal.

 Q:  Why didn’t we continue negotiations instead of going to arbitration?

A:  The CLA and its successor, the NPA, gave flight attendants a “Plan A” (ratified agreement) and a “Plan B” (binding arbitration following no Agreement or a rejected T/A) for reaching a joint mid-term contract.  Under the NPA, Flight attendants at the new American are guaranteed at least a market-rate contract, which represents immediate improvements of $112 million per year.

Without the backstop of binding arbitration, there would have been nothing to force mid-contract negotiations or to negotiate for a joint collective bargaining agreement. Only after the LUS and the LAA CBAs become amendable (2018 and 2019) would Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act apply, legally compelling AA to negotiate with APFA.

 AmericanAirlines + US Airways 
“On Our Way”

Kelli Harrington, LAX-I
FACT Rep Coordinator