this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
351 points (98.9% liked)

unions

1657 readers
39 users here now

a community focused on union news, info, discussion, etc

Friends:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please 52 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Reminder that flight attendants only get paid while the plane doors are closed. All of the flight prep, onboarding, stowing baggage, deplaning afterwards, cleanup afterwards, etc is entirely unpaid.

[–] Zron 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I still don’t understand how that’s legal.

Their place of employment is the airplane, they have duties that are required to be performed before and after passengers embark, they should be payed the moment they step foot on the aircraft.

It’s not legal for a retail store to not pay you while closing up the store, so why is legal for airlines to not pay attendant when the plane is open.

[–] grayman 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The funniest part of this is that there's approved union contact in place that agrees with this statement. How is it that both sides could agree to what appears to be illegal?

[–] Zron 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How can a union contract supersede state and federal law?

[–] grayman 1 points 1 year ago

If a contract existed before a law, there can be an exception. It's rather unfortunate.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago

That’s insane. Especially considering the scope of thier ‘doors closed’ normal job is a nightmare.

I had to google this because it is so absurd I didn’t believe it:

https://flightattendant.pro/flight-attendant-pay-explained/#:~:text=The%20flight%20attendant%20will%20continue,hotel%20room%20for%20the%20night.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

99.5% (with 93% of eligible employees voting) is a stunning number. But also one that tragically highlights how bad it has gotten. It's very hard to get so many people to agree on much these days. But they virtually all agree that the pay is too damn low.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the second quarter of 2023, the company reported profits of $1.34 billion, with revenue rising to a quarterly record for the company of $14 billion.

It hasn't gotten that bad for everyone. What a broken system.

[–] Rilichu 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So AA has ~130,000 employees so at $1.34B that's about $10,000/employee. Seems like they got plenty in the old war chest to be giving out raises left and right so surely that's what they're doing, right?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

They're not. And don't call me Shirley.

[–] RGB3x3 18 points 1 year ago

Unionize unionize unionize!

All the support to them

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Pretty risky calling in an air strike on American soil

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

TLDR: they can start striking as soon as 30 days, pending the cooling off period and regulator support. They are looking for an immediate 35% pay raise with annual raises of 6%

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Seriously, what in the fuck is wrong with the USA? The government has to approve a strike? What interest would the government have in approving a strike?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's from a 1926 law targeted at Railways, and then expanded to Airlines a decade or so later. This system was originally negotiated between Unions and the railway companies with the intent to reduce disruption to critical transportation systems but it really ended up hurting the unions leverage.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Thank you for the explanation :)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dont be too disruptive now or Biden might stop you

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are all the downvotes forgetting about the railroad strike?

I agree that it was disruptive, but neutering a union action makes it near pointless.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except the rail union got what they wanted, and credited Biden's administration for making it happen.

https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

fuck IBEW they were anti-collective bargaining Biden apologists before Biden banned rail unions right to strike. They're electrical workers not rail workers, they always had sick days.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As the press release I linked explains, IBEW represents a lot of rail workers, though not all. Sick leave agreements have also been reached with several other rail workers unions, which means that around 60% of rail workers now have sick leave. That's still less than it should be, and the unions should not stop pushing until 100% of workers have sick leave, but it's progress.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

IBEW represents no rail workers. they have one small branch representing a few electrical workers that work at railroads. But because they've been the biggest Biden apologists, rich folks have latched onto them as the face of rail unions. Look, they're happy to not be allowed to collectively bargain.

Unions shouldnt stop pushing, they were fucking banned from pushing for sick leave. How can they ever bargain for anything ever again after this precedent?

[–] Worldofwaa 9 points 1 year ago

99.5 percent support with a .5 percent margin of error