American Airlines went directly to flight attendants yesterday, offering an immediate 17% raise with no strings attached, even before a new contract is ratified. But the union promptly and unanimously shot down the offer. Negotiations now enter a critical phase ahead of a potential strike next month.
Union Rejects Immediate 17% Raise For American Airlines Flight Attendants
On Tuesday, June 4, 2024, American Airlines told the Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA) that it was prepared to offer an immediate 17% pay raise to flight attendants and a new and more generous profit-sharing formula. These changes would take effect immediately and not replace the ongoing bargaining for a new contract. On Wednesday, AA CEO Robert Isom communicated this offer directly to flight attendants in a video message shared with Live And Let’s Fly:
Hi, everyone.
I have an important update for you.
The company and APFA negotiating teams have been meeting regularly for months to reach a new agreement. We have made progress in a number of key areas, but there’s still a good deal of work to be done.
We will be back at the table with APFA leadership next week and a deal is within reach, but I don’t know how long it will take to get to the finish line and I don’t want another day to go by without increasing your pay.
So, to get more money to you now, we presented APFA with a proposal that offers immediate wage increases of 17% and a new formula that would increase your 2024 profit sharing.
This means we’ve offered increased pay for all flight attendants and are not asking your union for anything in return. This is unusual. But these are unusual times.
If APFA agrees, the increase would be effective for the June bid month, and you would see the increased rates in your pay on June 30.
Importantly, this does not replace our commitment to get the deal done as soon as possible but gives each of you an increase in pay now. We are committed to reaching a new agreement and now is the time to make a deal.
Thank you for all you do every day to care for our customers.
The union, however, promptly shot the offer down:
Today, American Airlines CEO Robert Isom released a video detailing a company proposal to offer an immediate 17% pay increase on June 1, 2024, without reaching an agreement on a complete contract. This proposal was sent to APFA yesterday afternoon. Management was informed that we would discuss the offer with the APFA Board of Directors.
American Airlines Flight Attendants want and need a complete contract addressing all our concerns. We have a strike vote authorization of 99.47 percent, have picketed for months, and have demonstrated our resolve and solidarity. Our message has been crystal clear: we need an industry-leading contract.
Per management’s request, the National Mediation Board has scheduled a last-ditch effort to reach an agreement next Monday through Thursday. Management should focus on reaching an agreement with APFA rather than concocting schemes to take the pressure off.
The APFA Board of Directors unanimously rejects management’s proposal and encourages, in the strongest way possible, the company to put all of its attention towards reaching an agreement with our Union and avoiding a crippling strike.
I’m of the opinion that the union blundered in failing to accept this offer. Free money with no strings attached? You take it, especially when expressing moral outrage that flight attendants have not seen a raise since January 1, 2019.
Clearly, the union thinks it can do better and that accepting this would weaken its bargaining position. I do not deny that…it would take some of the urgency off and likely prolong negotiations. It might make the National Mediation Board less likely to release the flight attendants to strike.
But on the other hand, can flight attendants reasonably expect anything better? The union seems to think so and I can certainly understand when pilots make up to $400/hour and Isom made $31 million last year. Yet isn’t a bird in the hand worth two in the bush? Wouldn’t a 17% pay raise make a HUGE difference in the lives of junior flight attendants, whom the union claims are struggling to survive?
If anything, this offer gives flight attendants even more leverage since the 17% pay raise would no longer be a dangling carrot on the negotiating stick. The idea that this would end negotiations for a new contract is not persuasive.
CONCLUSION
American Airlines has gone directly to flight attendants and offered an immediate 17% pay raise. Fearing it would dilute its bargaining power, the union quickly rejected the offer. Negotiations between the union and management continue, with the union preparing members for a strike and holding out for a better offer. While there is a high risk at this point of a strike and that passengers will be caught in the middle, I predict (and perhaps I am far too optimistic) a deal by the end of next week.
When will union members start to understand that the unions don’t want them to thrive? They need them to struggle and be miserable because that is the only reason anyone would want to pay a union.
@Doug … I paid dues to every union or association because they provided representation when bad bosses come into view . I worried more about bad bosses .
It would be funny to see a man-made operational crisis at AA, plus the pax riots that would ensue in Miami when they realize their flight has been canceled due to the strike. Please let this happen!
Profit sharing at AA, yea that’s a nonstarter. That said, the union sucks and isn’t helping the members.
Flight attendants responded by barricading the galley with seatbelts. Oh, wait, they did that before.
Heard a couple GEUs at universities were recently negotiating and immediately took 12% pay increases and in contrast, grad students usually make half to about two-thirds of what FAs make with less benefits.
Grad students lay-abouts on couches vs. comparison with hard working FAs in their feet for hours ?
Grad students TA-ing perhaps four classes a week whilst pontificating vs. FAs dealing with boorish pax all day ?
Please please give us a break .
Grad students are overworked and underpaid where they can’t meet a living wage. They’re contracted most of the time to work 20 hours a week but usually work 40-60 hours/week so they can meet their advisor’s demands and try to graduate on time. Most research and almost about half of the classes taught at R1 universities in the US is through the labor of grad students.
I get that you have a boogeyman type of image about grad students as a whole, but it doesn’t mean you get to say a bunch of bull that discredits their profession.
Okay APFA, turn up your nose on free and immediate help for your members and no one will believe the sorrowful poor-mouthing any more. It’s difficult to have sympathy for greed.
@Maryland … I suspect the greed is more on the part of management , and their bonuses . I would likely hold out for a strike with commensurate percentages as the pilots were given .
I can’t help but think that your reaction is exactly what AA’s executive leadership is looking for with this offer. They know the FAs won’t take it, but they want folks to think the FAs are greedy.
If the FA’s really haven’t had a raise since January 2019– inflation alone from Jan 2019 to present day is about 25%, at a minimum. After no raises for 5.5 years, an offer of a raise with no back-dating, that dramatically lags the cost of living increases over that time period seems like a pretty lowball offer to my eyes.
Asking for a raise when the company is losing money isn’t going to be popular, but the pilots got paid, and the execs are getting paid.
I’m not really a fan of FAs and their union, but an offer like this helps me understand why they have a union.
I think it’s crucial to delve deeper into the recent changes within AA and the impact of its merger with USAirways. The alterations in work rules, particularly regarding international route qualifications and bidding procedures, have been significant. These changes have not only affected the daily lives of employees but have also created a ripple effect, making it increasingly difficult for them to support their families while altering the AA service model, which has impacted service for customers.
Take, for instance, the closure of SFO by AA. This move seems strategic, aiming to phase out older workers and disrupt the lives of those remaining by forcing them to relocate to different bases. Furthermore, the limited transfer options within California exacerbate the situation, adding unnecessary stress and uncertainty to employees’ lives.
The actions of AA’s executive team appear to be focused solely on profit margins, with little regard for the well-being of its workforce. The lack of salary increases for over five plus years, coupled with the stagnation of wages for new hires, paints a grim picture. Many employees are struggling to make ends meet, with salaries hovering dangerously close to poverty levels.
This downward trend can be traced back to the merger with USAirways. The shift in focus from quality service to a budget-centric model has been evident, with cost-cutting measures taking precedence over employee satisfaction and customer service. It seems that shareholder profits have become the primary concern, at the expense of both employees and passengers.
The merger with USAirways has undoubtedly played a significant role in driving down standards at AA, creating an environment where profitability trumps all other considerations. It’s time that AA makes an offer for comparable wage increases and work rule changes comparable to other legacy airlines.
more proof that unions are what is wrong with our country
Unions. Always looking out for themselves. And the DNC. Follow the money.
It’s important to clarify that attributing the issues at American Airlines solely to the unions would be misleading. Several factors contribute to the current state of affairs, many of which are within the airline’s control.
Firstly, the decline in the quality of service cannot be solely blamed on the unions. AA’s decision to alter the training for flight attendants, shifting away from customer service-oriented programs, has undoubtedly played a significant role. This shift in focus has impacted the passenger experience and contributed to the dissatisfaction among customers.
Secondly, the bidding system and route allocations imposed by AA have made the lives of flight attendants exceptionally challenging. The demanding nature of these systems has led to increased exhaustion and dissatisfaction among employees, further exacerbating the existing issues.
Thirdly, AA’s intensified efforts to terminate senior employees as a cost-cutting measure cannot be overlooked. This approach, aimed at lowering overall expenses, has had detrimental effects on employee morale and productivity.
Lastly, American’s expectation for employees to reside in urban centers with high living costs while offering wages that barely exceed poverty levels is simply untenable. This discrepancy between living expenses and wages adds an additional layer of financial strain on employees, further contributing to their dissatisfaction.
In summary, while unions may play a role in advocating for employee rights, the root causes of the issues at American Airlines extend beyond their influence. It’s imperative for the airline to address these internal challenges and prioritize the well-being of its workforce to foster a more sustainable and harmonious working environment.
are unions, workers and anyone else only supposed to be looking out for you? That’s their job. looking out for their members. you look out for your benefit don’t you? you (maybe) are the head of your own union (your family) do you not look out for them , or do you prefer to look out for your boss?
It’s crucial to delve deeper into the recent changes within AA and the impact of its merger with USAirways. The alterations in work rules, particularly regarding international route qualifications and bidding procedures, have been significant. These changes have not only affected the daily lives of employees but have also created a ripple effect, making it increasingly difficult for them to support their families.
Take, for instance, the closure of SFO by AA. This move seems strategic, aiming to phase out older workers and disrupt the lives of those remaining by forcing them to relocate to different bases. Furthermore, the limited transfer options within California exacerbate the situation, adding unnecessary stress and uncertainty to employees’ lives.
The actions of AA’s executive team appear to be focused solely on profit margins, with little regard for the well-being of its workforce. The lack of salary increases for over five years, coupled with the stagnation of wages for new hires, paints a grim picture. Many employees are struggling to make ends meet, with salaries hovering dangerously close to poverty levels.
This downward trend can be traced back to the merger with USAirways. The shift in focus from quality service to a budget-centric model has been evident, with cost-cutting measures taking precedence over employee satisfaction and customer service. It seems that shareholder profits have become the primary concern, at the expense of both employees and passengers.
As we discuss these issues, it’s essential to recognize the broader implications of these decisions. The merger with USAirways has undoubtedly played a significant role in driving down standards at AA, creating an environment where profitability trumps all other considerations.
The author of this article seems to think in the very short term. He contradicts himself when he suggests they “take the 17% now”, but also suggests that the company was willing to shell out more for their pilots and CEO.
A 17% raise sounds AMAZING if you think about it in the short-term and don’t consider the history and future. To just MATCH the rate of inflation from 2019 to 2024, they would need at 22.6% raise, and who’s to say that AA wont hold out on providing raises till the next contract?
Do you really think a BELOW INFLATION RATE raise would swing the flight attendants from 99.47% voting to strike to anywhere close to <60 or what ever number would be required for them to not strike?
NINETY-NINE PERCENT!!!
I would like to know the flight attendants demands and if the 17% raise would solely address their concerns. I also would like to know the terms of the current deal that was offered; duration, benefits added, benefits removed, why?
It’s not the finished product, it’s a starting point. You take what you can get as you go along. Take this and keep going. It’s not like this is the final offer…
I don’t know what the union or the FAs want from American, but I do know at my airline, an increase in pay is very far down the list for me in contract negotiations. I’m no fan of unions, but I’d be furious if the union accepted a 17% pay raise without addressing the real issues. My quality of life has become so degraded the past several years that I am much more focused on that in negotiations than on hourly pay. I’d also like to be treated by my superiors as something with at least equal value to a disposable stir stick. I truly believe that if we were treated as human beings and had a tiny bit better work rules, the new hires would stop quitting in droves as soon as they were hired.
The worst sin in aviation is a jet sitting idle on the tarmac sucking up resources. To get AA to the table, the FAs need to strike to capture the attention of the C Suite, stock holders, and BOD. That’s the only way to get what is needed for parity.
Until the Government steps aside and they all get replaced. Do not underestimate when greed is too much. If it were so easy the pilots and FA’s would be running the airline. Sorry, it’s not that easy. And the Unions need a wake up call to the reality that they could, if pushing beyond limits, be left sitting with a bad hand at a table stacked against them. As I think they are now.
It is incredibly disingenuous to label an offer like this as “no strings attached”. Mr. Klint has repeatedly showed his anti-labor bias in previous pieces. His stance here shows a fundamental lack of understanding of collective bargaining and the complexities that are involved in achieving a full contract.
The strings attached are the weakening of labor’s overall negotiating position and a further delay in obtaining a full contract. As a previous commenter stated, pay is only one aspect of a labor agreement and is not always at the top. Quality of life aspects top the list for many union members and completion of a full contract is the only way to address all the issues that are on the table.
This offer is a band-aid fix that is designed to buy time for management. It is naive for anyone to think that American management wants to give a raise out of the goodness of their hearts. The situation is clearly coming to a crescendo at American and they want to make the Flight Attendants look bad in the eyes of the public and possibly the mediator. As APFA pointed out in their statement, put effort into completing the contract and not circumventing the process. Hopefully the mediator can see this for what it is and will allow the process to move forward. If management is unwilling to negotiate a full contract and an impasse has been reached, the Flight Attendants should be released to the self help phase.
AA CEO Isom is compensated at 1162 times, or $31.4 million, from the starting salary of AA FAs, $27,000/yr, who have been provided letters by the company attesting to their poverty-level wages. Not only is the difference shocking in its gross abuse but should be outlawed. Shareholders aren’t compensating Isom and his cronies, they are seeking a viable investment in a premium company with world class service… AKA all front line AA personnel.
to the union haters: the union is the contract bargaining unit of the employees, for Isom to attempt to circumvent that is bad faith on his part. when 99.4% of the Flight attendants say they will strike, Isom has no reason to try a run around the union. it’s clear those who speak ill of the flight attendants, and/or the union have no idea of what’s actually involved.
Matthew, it is in fact a final offer. if the FA’s accept the raise, they ALSO accept the rest of the contract, which Isom even says” has work to be done”. this is ISOM bargaining in bad faith. he’s just as bad as Carty, Arpey and Horton.
You’re saying the 17% offer represents a new CBA?
Tom, there is so much involved. AA is asking for roughly 20 more flying hours per month. the current “basic schedule” is 65-75 hours. they want it to increase to more than 80. they want to reduce layover rest times to the minimum required by law, or the minimum turn around time for the flight , AA wants to remove retirement benefits, and basically make it a high rotation job so they don’t have to offer any benefits. feel free to call the APFA and ask. they will tell you.