Judge blocks Northwest flight attendants from striking

[JEP]

A federal judge in New York today granted Northwest Airlines' request for an injunction to prohibit flight attendants from engaging in targeted strikes against the carrier.
Liz Fedor, Star Tribune
Last update: September 15, 2006 – 11:34 AM

A federal judge in New York today granted Northwest Airlines' request for an injunction to prohibit flight attendants from engaging in targeted strikes against the carrier.

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero's decision comes three weeks after he temporarily barred flight attendants from going on strike. At that time, attendants were ready to begin a campaign of walkouts on selected flights.

The Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) has fought to preserve the right of flight attendants to strike because it would enhance the union's bargaining power at the negotiating table.

"We believe this decision is obviously an incorrect reading of the law and the rights of workers in the United States. We will appeal," David Borer, AFA general counsel, said in a statement.

Mollie Reiley, interim president of the Northwest flight attendants union, said, "Management and the courts can gang up on us but they cannot defeat us."

Flight attendants have rejected two tentative agreements with management of the bankrupt carrier that included deep concessions. Northwest imposed pay rates and work rules on the attendants July 31, the day the second deal was rejected.

Shortly before 10 a.m. today, Northwest released the following statement:

"Judge Marrero's decision to grant Northwest the injunction allows our customers to continue to book Northwest Airlines with confidence, knowing that we will get them to their destinations reliably."

The terms that Northwest imposed allowed it to achieve the $195 million in annual savings that it was seeking at the bargaining table. Union leaders said those changes amount to severe wage and benefit cuts of about 40 percent.

Before Northwest filed for bankruptcy a year ago, the union said that the average flight attendant was earning about $42,000 a year. That average annual pay has dropped to about $33,000.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Allan Gropper ruled Aug. 17 that federal labor law did not allow him to block a strike by Northwest attendants.

In his ruling today, Marrero reversed the Gropper decision.

"This is yet another example of how the legal system fails to protect working families," Reiley said. "The courts continue to cater to corporate America. But we have a warning for the executives at Northwest and across this country who think they can litigate greed: This fight isn't over."

Northwest flight attendants have been working under pay cuts for about 10 months. Their former union agreed to temporary pay cuts in November, and Northwest imposed its concessionary pay rates, benefits and work rules on July 31.

After today's legal development, it's unclear when the two parties will return to the bargaining table to negotiate a deal that attendants would approve.

In its statement, Northwest said, "While the court decision is reassuring to our customers, we remain committed to negotiating a consensual agreement with our flight attendants. We hope to accomplish that goal in the near future."

There are about 8,000 or so flight attendants at Northwest. Many have retired or resigned since the temporary wage cuts took effect almost a year ago. Northwest is in the process of recalling all 1,131 attendants who have been on furloughs.

Liz Fedor • 612-673-7709 • lfedor@startribune.com

[MikeD]

And so if the FAs strike anyways? What's gonna happen? They going to be forced to go to work? Yeah, right. They make next to no money anyways, what the heck do they have to lose by striking anyway?

[Cazadores]

Originally Posted by MikeD

And so if the FAs strike anyways? What's gonna happen? They going to be forced to go to work? Yeah, right. They make next to no money anyways, what the heck do they have to lose by striking anyway?

I think AFA could be sued for large sums of $$$ by NW Management-further hurting the unions ability to stay on property.

[JEP]

Originally Posted by MikeD

And so if the FAs strike anyways? What's gonna happen? They going to be forced to go to work? Yeah, right. They make next to no money anyways, what the heck do they have to lose by striking anyway?

That was my question. I guess this will test the resolve of the FA's. On another note, the mechaniccs that struck over a year ago were just granted unemployment benefits by the state here in MN. Something about being forced out with no other choice. The FA's here in MN at least may be able to draw some dough if it does happen.

[Doug Taylor]

If they don't have a contract, they're probably effectively conducting a 'walkout'.

I think. I dunno.

But if you're not bound by a contract, how can you be in violation of the RLA? Wait.

Dangit!

Where's our labor attorney when we need him!

[meritflyer]

Originally Posted by MikeD

And so if the FAs strike anyways? What's gonna happen? They going to be forced to go to work? Yeah, right. They make next to no money anyways, what the heck do they have to lose by striking anyway?

They could face criminal charges and/or lose their jobs if I recall correctly.

[blee256]

this is sooooo wrong, If we are part of the RLA, if they can sek self help (imposing their own terms) why cant labor use their form of self help, work stoppage? Unions have no leverage now. every company in BK, should just impose whatever they want then.

Thank God, the appeals court ruled that Mesaba cant impose their work rules. Becuase if it wasnt imposed I guarantee you that XJ would have started the clock on the 10 day notice after hearing todays ruling.

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

They could face criminal charges and/or lose their jobs if I recall correctly.

Which is just a stupid and wrong concept, IMO. They're already being screwed over by management, don't make money as is, and now are being told they don't have the recourse to strike.

Screw it. There's nothing to lose. I'd LOVE to see cops attempt to haul striking FAs off to jail, or the management attempt to force them to go work for the beans they make.

This is absolutely amazing. How much are these people suppose to get stomped on by management and the courts, before finally saying "to hell with this" and striking anyway?

I'm not sure about the criminal charges, though. Not doubting what you're saying, I'm simply wondering how they could be brought up on charges, and for what.

[Cazadores]

Originally Posted by MikeD

I'm not sure about the criminal charges, though. Not doubting what you're saying, I'm simply wondering how they could be brought up on charges, and for what.

Contempt maybe? I don't think the judge ordered them to work, he just said they couldn't strike, so they would lose whatever "protections" that intails i guess. You're right, if the Flight Attendants just stopped showing up at the gate, what are they going to do? What do they have to lose?

Maybe in response ALPA should invoke S.O.S. and shut the M-F'ing system down until people wake up.

[wheelsup]

Originally Posted by MikeD

They going to be forced to go to work? Yeah, right.

Keep in mind NO ONE is forcing the FA's to go to work. They can quit without consequence right now (at least to my knowledge).

[MQAAord]

Nobody can force anyone to go to work.

They do still at least have the right to quit. Indentured servantude is still illegal in the U.S.

This ruling just infuriates me. Who the hell does NWA management and the courts think they are. That NWA can just impose WHATEVER on the F/As and they have no right to self-help in return?!

I'm so mad about this I could just spit. It makes me damn glad I'm not working anymore, and even happier that I got sent home from my NWA interview in 1997 for being too short. It was the best thing to ever happen to me.

[OldTownPilot]

And thus continues the war on labor....

[kellwolf]

I'm once again baffled as to how the courts can say "management can enforce self-help, but not labor." I guess each individual FA will have to file BK, then maybe they can use self-help. Seems to work the other way when management is in BK.

NWA states that they are still willing to work out a consensual agreement? Only if the appeal goes the AFA's way. Why the hell would they want an agreement that gives the FAs more? Management already has what it wants. I don't expect to see them put forth much effort at the bargaining table unless the AFA wins the appeal.

Labor took a step forward with Mesaba and was shoved three steps back by NWA.....

As far as Mesaba, if terms were imposed on them, I wouldn't expect a strike, just a mass quitting.

[deserteaglle]

Excuse me for being a n00b who doesn't know what he's talking about, but if they make crap pay, have a crappy work environment, and just hate their jobs overall, can't they just quit and go make the same money somewhere else with maybe a little better QOL.

It's not like they have job security, it's not like theyre really seeing the world, they're obviously not making money. Where's the glamour? Why is it so great that they want to stick it out?

Like I said, maybe I'm missing something, maybe I'm just a retarded n00b, but it seems like the same things goes for pilots and F/A's alike.

If it's so horrible why not just do something different? I understand the wish to fly, I lvoe it just as much as anyone else who really would rather be a pilot than anything else. But it doesn't seem like you can work for the man, accept a check from the Man, commit yourself to the Man, and expect the Man to stop doing things the way he's doing them. It obviously works right? YOU'RE doing it?

Once again, I'm admitting some level of ignorance on the subject, and I'm definitely not trying to call anyone out, but I would REALLY like to hear the answers to these questions, my mind is just having trouble comprehending. WHY?

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by deserteaglle

Excuse me for being a n00b who doesn't know what he's talking about, but if they make crap pay, have a crappy work environment, and just hate their jobs overall, can't they just quit and go make the same money somewhere else with maybe a little better QOL.

It's not like they have job security, it's not like theyre really seeing the world, they're obviously not making money. Where's the glamour? Why is it so great that they want to stick it out?

Like I said, maybe I'm missing something, maybe I'm just a retarded n00b, but it seems like the same things goes for pilots and F/A's alike.

If it's so horrible why not just do something different? I understand the wish to fly, I lvoe it just as much as anyone else who really would rather be a pilot than anything else. But it doesn't seem like you can work for the man, accept a check from the Man, commit yourself to the Man, and expect the Man to stop doing things the way he's doing them. It obviously works right? YOU'RE doing it?

Once again, I'm admitting some level of ignorance on the subject, and I'm definitely not trying to call anyone out, but I would REALLY like to hear the answers to these questions, my mind is just having trouble comprehending. WHY?

Fair question. I've got no dog in that fight, but I'm thinking that there's probably a feeling of principles, of the fact that this is their job and livlihood. Maybe some of them potentially have some sort of long-term vested interest in what they're doing......maybe they like where they live, enjoy the job overall, and it pays the bills for them and they don't feel like being treated like crap. Could be any number of factors that may make just quitting not a viable option.

[deserteaglle]

Originally Posted by MikeD

Fair question. I've got no dog in that fight, but I'm thinking that there's probably a feeling of principles, of the fact that this is their job and livlihood. Maybe some of them potentially have some sort of long-term vested interest in what they're doing......maybe they like where they live, enjoy the job overall, and it pays the bills for them and they don't feel like being treated like crap. Could be any number of factors that may make just quitting not a viable option.

Pretty good answer, I can see that.

Be good to hear from some F/A's though...I would like to hear MQAAOord's take...not sure if you got tired of what they put you through or what? I'm genuinely interested to hear.

[MQAAord]

Originally Posted by deserteaglle

Excuse me for being a n00b who doesn't know what he's talking about, but if they make crap pay, have a crappy work environment, and just hate their jobs overall, can't they just quit and go make the same money somewhere else with maybe a little better QOL.

Once upon a time, F/As didn't make crap pay (it was never very much, but at a major it was liveable), the work environment hasn't always been crappy, and all F/As at one point liked their jobs. In fact most of them like the job just fine, it's the pay cuts, management bonuses, reduction in schedule quality and abusive passengers that they hate.

Originally Posted by deserteaglle

It's not like they have job security, it's not like theyre really seeing the world, they're obviously not making money. Where's the glamour? Why is it so great that they want to stick it out?

Why shouldn't F/As have job security? Maybe we're fighting FOR job security! Maybe we want to know that we can't be tossed aside seasonally like a clothing wardrobe. There are some overnights where you can still 'see' parts of the world. They're becoming fewer with so much reduced rest these days, but they're out there.

No, they're not making any money. There certainly isn't any glamour. Really, there never has been. The only glamour there is in the F/A job is the glamour people think you have as you walk down the terminal.

Why is it so great? Why is any job great? Maybe some F/As really enjoy their job. Maybe they like the unique job duties, that vary from safety and security to compassion, and first aid. Maybe some F/As get satisfaction in helping an unaccompanied minor get home from Grandma's house.

Originally Posted by deserteagle

If it's so horrible why not just do something different?

Ah yes, the old "if you don't like it leave" philosophy. Sure, when it comes right down to it, don't do the job if you really don't like it. But, consider this. If the pay and compensation for the job are reduced such that the vast majority of current F/As do just that, quit, and the job is now devalued and sucks SO bad that nobody will stay at the job for very long now you have a new problem. You'll get a lower quality people doing the job, people who, in the event of an emergency evacuation will throw all procedure out the window in selfishness and do the "Follow Me" method of evacuation instead of doing what a F/A is supposed to, and that's COMMAND the evacuation! There have been MANY people who've survived airplane crashes because they heard the F/As at the doors shouting commands. The smoke was so thick, and they were disoriented, but the sound of the F/A's voice 'snapped' them back, and gave them a point to crawl towards, AN EXIT!

We're fighting to retain the quality of this job. For current and future F/As.

Originally Posted by deserteaglle

I would like to hear MQAAOord's take...not sure if you got tired of what they put you through or what?

I'm furloughed. I did not leave AA by choice. I was kicked out on my ass. Twice.

[deserteaglle]

I think you must feel that I'm trying to come off with a different tone than I'm intending.

I do not think that they should not have job security, I do not think that they should be paid crap, and I do not think that they should be walked all over.

What I'm saying is that they DO do those things, and I don't understand how continuing to work there is going to change that, and if things probably are not going to change, and management isn't going to all of a sudden (lose all of their f/a's) come to their senses without (losing all of their f/a's) something big happening, why stay?

To break it down more...If someone works under current conditions, why is someone who's interested in primarily in $$$ going to change the way they are doing things? Why stay when those conditions are going to continue and and they are just plain unfair?

We're fighting to retain the quality of this job. For current and future F/As.

Is the their attempt to strike "the fight"? I ask because a judge is telling them that that weapon is not an option for them, and it seems to me the only way to stand up and stop the abuse is to remove oneself from the situation and just quit.

I really think it would be impossible to get all F/A's to just up and quit (which would probably jar the airlines to an extent that they would hopefully wake up a little), but I haven't seen how bitterness and going back to work has helped the situation.

Basically it just seems like a bad deal, there's really no way to win, and it just doesn't seem right.

[MQAAord]

Originally Posted by deserteaglle

Is the their attempt to strike "the fight"? I ask because a judge is telling them that that weapon is not an option for them,

Yes, that is their fight. Really, it's about the only option! I can only hope that the appeal comes back in favor of the F/As, and that 'self-help' isn't ruled to only work one-way!



I was hearing a different tone from your other post, sometimes it's hard to correctly hear what someone is saying on a message board! Call it miscommunication, but I get what you're saying now

[deserteaglle]

Well good, I thought you were getting mad at me for a second.lol

[wheelsup]

Originally Posted by deserteaglle

Excuse me for being a n00b who doesn't know what he's talking about, but if they make crap pay, have a crappy work environment, and just hate their jobs overall, can't they just quit and go make the same money somewhere else with maybe a little better QOL.

I read an article about an ex-[insert legacy carrier] FA whom had a pension of $4,000.00/month cut to $300.00 after 9/11. So, to answer your question, it wasn't ALWAYS as bad as it is right now.

We also have an ex-TWA cum AA FA here. If she were to go back to AA (like they will ever recall while recall rights are still in place...) she would be making $52.00/hr. That's what, around $60k/yr? Not bad, even by todays standards.

That being said, once it gets to an unlivable (sp?) point for these people, they will just quit. They are trying to make a stand and cause a strike (because striking would be more effective - when they go back to work they keep their senority and pay vs. the airline hiring all new 1st year employees, which I'm guessing is what they want...). If I was at mesaba, and my FO pay dropped 20%, I would quit outright. I couldn't afford the how many years it would take to call a strike.

Eventually, if pay continues its downward trend, you will see illegals and bums in the front seats and serving drinks vs. educated citizens...

[mpenguin1]

Originally Posted by MQAAord

Nobody can force anyone to go to work.

They do still at least have the right to quit. Indentured servantude is still illegal in the U.S.

This ruling just infuriates me. Who the hell does NWA management and the courts think they are. That NWA can just impose WHATEVER on the F/As and they have no right to self-help in return?!

I'm so mad about this I could just spit. It makes me damn glad I'm not working anymore, and even happier that I got sent home from my NWA interview in 1997 for being too short. It was the best thing to ever happen to me.

The whole reason that the Bankruptcy courts exist is to protect the company.