ALPA as Management

[blueridge71]

Has everyone seen this email from ALPA regarding the administrative employees going on strike? How is that for irony? A union's employees going on strike. It does seem that they already have it better than a lot of ALPA members who pay their salaries. They don't pay anything on their health insurance and get reimbursed for FICA, for example.

On the other hand, it is yet another example of how concessionary contracts hurt more than just the employees who take the concessions.


Contents of the Rejected Unit 2 Agreement

ALPA has been informed by the leaders of the Union of ALPA Professional and Administrative Employees, Unit 2, that their members are on strike effective 12 noon May 12, 2006. As reported earlier, ALPA and Unit 2 (which represents the union’s clerical and administrative employees) have been negotiating with a goal of reaching a consensual agreement on the terms of their collective bargaining agreement.

Earlier this week, ALPA and Unit 2 completed a tentative agreement that contained merit salary increases, delayed health care cost increases, and improved several other areas of the contract. Unit 2 members have rejected that TA. While there are no updates on talks with Unit 2 negotiators, a number of pilots have enquired about details of the tentative agreement they have rejected. Here is a brief summary of the details of the rejected agreement.

Compensation
The rejected TA stretched to the limit the Association’s ability to provide salary increases that do not cause costs to grow faster than revenue. ALPA pilots at major airlines – including US Airways, Delta, Northwest and United – have taken pay cuts of as much as 40% or more, and have signed long-term contracts with minimal raises. ALPA dues revenue is less than it was when both the current Unit 2 and Unit 1 contracts were signed, and the dues outlook looks worse. The average contractual raises for pilots at seven of our largest airline - US Airways, Alaska, America West, Continental, Delta, Northwest and United – that comprise nearly two-thirds of ALPA’s dues revenue will be less than 1.5% over the next three years.

The rejected TA provided Unit 2 employees a merit increase of up 3.5% each year for the duration of the 3 year agreement, up from the 3% pay raise effective for the last year of the expired contract. As a comparison, the Economic Research Institute projects that pay raises for administrative positions will grow at a rate less than the 3.75% forecasted average for all U.S. workers. Additionally, while most US workers are required to work 40-hour work weeks, Unit 2 employees have, and will continue to have, a 35-hour work week.

The TA also provided for the continuation of a reimbursement of FICA taxes of up to $4,550 per year, which provides 100% reimbursement to every Unit 2 employee making under $59,000 per year. This is a traditional benefit for ALPA employees, but a rarity elsewhere.

Health Care
Despite significant and continued increases in health care costs, ALPA does not require monthly premium contributions from employees for individual or family coverage. In 2005, only 17% of U.S. employers paid 100% of workers’ individual premiums for single employees, and only 6% of U.S. employers paid 100% of premiums for families. The TA would have continued the benefit of not requiring monthly premium contributions.

Unit 2 employees have not experienced an increase to their deductibles or co-insurance limits since May of 2003, and would have continued to enjoy the same until Jan. 1, 2008. The rejected TA provided for a $75 increase in in-network deductibles and co-insurance limits and a $150 increase in out-of-network deductibles and co-insurance limits, as well as higher co-pays for ER and hospital visits.

The TA also included a reduction in the reimbursement level of out-of-network medical expenses, from 80/20% to 70/30%. While this may result in a slight increase in out-of-pocket expenses for Unit 2 employees, the corresponding co-insurance limits would have continued to limit their overall exposure. Again, these changes would not have gone into effect until Jan. 1, 2008.

Retiree Health
ALPA provides a rich Retiree Health Plan for employees who reach age 56 with 18 years of service. Unit 2 members who retired before November 2003 were paying $15 -$30 per month per person over the 2000 – 2003 Unit 2 contract. The rejected TA provided that monthly premiums remain unchanged until July 2008, when they would have increased to $30 - $50 per month per person. There was also to be a modest increase to deductibles and co-insurance limits.

Unit 2 members who retired after November 2003 and are over 65 years of age were required to elect Medicare Part B and pay 10% of the calculated premium with a cap of $60 per person on a monthly basis. The TA provides for an increased cap of $75, effective January 1, 2008. Unit 2 members who retired after November 2003 and are under 65 years of age were required to pay 20% of the calculated premium with a cap of $120 per person on a monthly basis. The TA provides for an increased cap of $150, effective Jan. 1, 2008. There will also be a modest increase to deductibles and co-insurance limits for post-2003 retirees at that time.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Has everyone seen this email from ALPA regarding the administrative employees going on strike? How is that for irony? A union's employees going on strike. It does seem that they already have it better than a lot of ALPA members who pay their salaries. They don't pay anything on their health insurance and get reimbursed for FICA, for example.

On the other hand, it is yet another example of how concessionary contracts hurt more than just the employees who take the concessions.


.

No, everyone hasn't......oh wait you posted it for us..how nice...

It isn't ironic, unless of course you don't understand how the system works...

What would really be ironic is, if ALPA management treated thier unionized workers like airline management treated thier unionized workers.

It is amazing how so many of you continue to fail to educate yourselves. And when something like this happens you instictively try and cram it into your narrow understanding of how things work. It must be justified according to you... how else can it be?

Instead, why don't you try and accept it for what it is and understand it. Rather, you place a post on FI with your spin on it, trying to get validation of how you think.....

If it was such a negative, ALPA wouldn't have sent a Fastread to all its members explaining it... maybe they have more hope in you than me....

All I want for Christmas is an educated and free thininking ALPA membership.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=53627

Quote:
Originally Posted by surplus1
There are many issues, as anyone who reads my posts knows, on which I am highly critical, there's a lot of misinformation and lack of information evidenced by the replys in this thread.

In the original post, only 4 of the jobs listed are filled by pilots, i.e., President, 1st VP, VP Admin and VP Finance. The President is full-time and salaried. His salary is determined by the Board of Directors, each of whom is an elected pilot representative. There are guidelines that govern the President's salary. One of them is that it may not be less than he could earn flying the line at his respective airline, including night and international differential pay where applicable.

The current President is a senior NWA Captain of the B747-400, international, equipment 1/2 day, 1/2 night. He is at the max pay level for his company. His basic hourly rate is $232. He has an 2.4% defined benefit retirement plan and profit sharing (now negligible). His international per diem rate is $2.05 per hour. If he were to fly the max of 1000 hrs per year, which he could do if he chose, his base pay would be $232,000, plus the international and night/day overrides. On top of that he would draw per diem of an estimated 250 hrs/mo. That's just the base and does not include the value of retirement contributions made by the company or any other fringe benefit.

I happen to have a personal friend who flys the same airplane for the same company. He is also senior enough to be on the highest pay scale. I don't know exactly how many hours my friend flys in a year, but I do know that it is NOT the maximum (he's lazy). His W2 last year was in excess of $350K. I'd like to see you tell him that he's overpaid.

The ALPA President has to live in DC, whether he wants to or not. He gets allowances to cover those costs. As presient of ALPA he can't live in a tenement and deal with the people that he has to. So, he gets an apartment, which I believe is in the Watergate building. It's expensive, as is all housing of quality in DC. Of necessity, he has to entertain a lot of politicians and airline executives. His expense allowances are not inconsistent with what that costs. He gets a car, paid for by ALPA, and someone to drive it (although he often drives himself). Having a driver sort of helps when you have to go to so many events on "the hill" and run so many errands on an almost daily basis. He's a politician, dealing with the high and mighty in DC, and they don't eat at Mac Donald's. To me, his expenses are justified. If you want to play in the big leaguse in Washington, it costs big money to do it.

I'm no fan of the current ALPA President, but his compensation is not really that far out of line for the job he is expected to do. You all need to be realistic. If you expect the man to be dealing with Senators, Congressmen, the Secretary of Transportation and Labor, etc., none of which he would have to do flying the line, then you have to pay for it.

The other 3 National Officers on the "evil" list are all earning salaries in accordance with what they could earn at their respective airlines.

Most, if not all of the other salaries listed apply to members of the so-called ALPA staff. These people are not pilots. Some of the lawyers and top level Administrators do have very high compensation. As in every company, some may be worth it and some not, depending on how you see what they do. There are two or three that I personally think are higher than they ought to be.

Enter a part of the equation that many of you don't appear to realize. Most of the other staff employees listed are unionized. Yes, that's right, they belong to labor unions themselves. Their "contracts" are the product of collective bargaining with ALPA. Many a time these negotiations have come very close to a strike as ALPA officials strive to control costs. Usually ALPA "caves" at the end. Now use your imagination just a little and think of what it would be like in terms of PR if ALPA, itself a labor union, was to be shut down by a strike. For practical reasons, that can't happen. Consequently, the staff have negotiated some very good contracts. By the way, the lawyers that are called Contract Administrators (CA's) are themselves members of their union.

Someone said the Contract Administrators aren't necessary. That just tells me that person doesn't have a clue. These people often represent several airlines each. They are involved in all contract negotiations. They play a role in every major grievance. They defend individual pilots before the FAA enforcement people. On top of that they often have to literally baby sit dozens of elected pilot representatives, who have the political power but are more often than not highly incompetent in labor relations and representation. Remember, the "representatives" are pilots. They are great at flying airplanes, but given the apathetic attention to their selection that is prevalent among pilot groups, a great many of them are not the shining kinghts in armour that you seem to believe. They do the best they can, but without the CA's the truth is they would not do much of anything but spin their wheels. Join the IBT or the IAM and you'll know what I mean. In my opinion, these people earn their money more than anyone on that list.

The CA's bosses are the high salaried "attorneys" on the list. Some of those aren't worth a plug nickle from my perspective, but they don't get there because they're smart. Remember seniority, the pilots shield? Well, they have the same system. Sometimes you get what you ask for and that is no less evident in the ALPA staff than it is in the left seat of airliners. Not all Captains are beacons of light, and neither are all lawyers. However, your "number" puts you into a lot of places you might not otherwise reach. Everything has an up and a down side and seniority is among those things.


One 717 fellow refered to fetherbedding reps and booze at MEC meetings. I don't know his experience, but as far as I know, ALPA doesn't pay for booze at local or MEC meetings. I'm not saying the booze is never there, but in almost every case that part of the bill is paid for by the participating pilots, not by the union. At national functions, that is not the case. I've never seen a local representative (within his own airline) get an expense reimbursement that included alcohol. Obviously I can't speak for everyone.

As for the BOD meetings. Yes, they are held in Florida. There are three prime reasons for that. 1) hotels in the Washington, DC area are a lot more expensive than they are in FL. 2) ALPA doesn't normaly hold its BOD meetings in non-union facilities. That limits the choices. 3) Finding a facility large enough to accomodate an ALPA BOD meeting is not as easy as it looks. Apart from that, pilots have to get to these meetings so, holding them in locations that do not have good airline access is not very bright.

None of what I've said is intended to "justify" anyting, but rather to explain some of the factors to those that may not understand. ALPA is far from perfect, but the allegations of corruption made on this board are not justified. ALPA's books are not secret from its members. You may not like what the union or some particular union official is doing, but they are NOT lining their own pockets with the pilots money. That is an unfounded allegation that has no basis in fact. There are no Jimmy Hoffas in ALPA.

We have as pilots many reasons to complain about ALPA's failures at the bargaining table and its internal politics but, in my opinion, fiduciary corruption is not one of them.

As for the efforts and the work of ALPA's staff, i.e., non-pilot employees, with very rare exception it is nothing but outstanding in both dedication and quality.

To those of you so eager to tear it down I say this: Don't sh_t where you eat; particularly not in public.