By a wide margin, flight attendants at United Airlines rejected a tentative agreement that would have provided substantial pay raises and backpay, but failed to address other workplace concerns in a satisfactory way.
United Airlines Flight Attendants Reject New Contract By Lopsided Margin
Over the last few weeks, flight attendants have been voting on a new contract. The voting closed earlier today and the results are overwhelming, with 92% of flight attendants casting a ballot. 71% voted not to ratify the agreement.
Ken Diaz, President of the United Airlines chapter of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA) said:
“United Flight Attendants today voted to send a strong message to United Airlines management by rejecting a tentative agreement that didn’t go far enough to address the years of sacrifice and hard work to make the airline the success it is today. This is democracy in action.
“Flight Attendants need substantial improvements as soon as possible. Our union will survey members as quickly as possible to identify the key issues Flight Attendants are ready to fight to achieve in an agreement they want to ratify. We always said no matter the outcome of the vote, we will fight forward and that is what we will do with the power of 28,000 Flight Attendants and our whole union standing together.”
Meanwhile, United told Live And Let’s Fly:
“Our flight attendants are the best in the industry and this tentative agreement included numerous improvements and industry leading pay. While this vote will result in a delay and the AFA has outlined several steps to return to negotiations, including coordination with the National Mediation Board, we remain focused on getting our flight attendants the contract they deserve.”
The union will begin surveying flight attendants “as quickly as possible” to “identify the key issues” that led to the lopsided vote against the contract (wouldn’t you think this was done already?).
This Vote Was Expected…
Folks, this is all part of the pageantry. Checking in with my flight attendant contacts at United over the last couple of weeks, I knew this would happen…flight attendants were not happy with the “first round” of the agreement.
There was misinformation out there to be sure (the union objected to bothstories I wrote on contractual disagreements), but there was the sense that the union left ambiguous what should not have been ambiguous, which would always be used by United for its own benefit.
While I don’t think United flight attendants can realistically expect more pay, they will seek more work-related concessions in round two.
But as long as backpay is on the table, flight attendants will drag this out as long as necessary…not that they will find a sympathetic advocate in the current administration (even the Biden-era National Mediation Board did not release them to strike).
What are they going to do? Coordinated sick-outs? Service slow-downs so that dinner service on a transatlantic flight takes five hours? I certainly hope not (and to be clear, I don’t expect that either).
I think it’s reasonable that flight attendants want black-and-white language in the new contract…they are correct that ambiguity is most often used against them. But I’m not sure what more they can get here and I strongly doubt they will get much more pay…what leverage do they realistically have? More press event interruptions?
CONCLUSION
Flight attendants at United Airlines have overwhelmingly rejected a new contract, with 71% voting it down. Yet I am not surprised.
My prediction is the union will secure a handful of verbiage concessions from United, the flight attendants will vote again, and this time they will begrudgingly accept the new contract, largely the same as it is now.
The elephant in the room is still that flight attendants are replaceable. That doesn’t mean that I am against inflation-adjusted wages after five years and treating these workers, many of whom I count as friends, with dignity and fairness…but it does make any analogies to the pilots’ contract (or even mechanics’) suspect.
United will get through this. So will the flight attendants. This first-round rejection is simply part of the game.
> Read More: 6 Clauses That Could Derail United’s New Flight Attendant Contract
> Read More:United Flight Attendants Turn Against Tentative Contract, Cite Failed Union Leadership
image: AFA-CWA
I’m glad you understand that this contract was NOT denied over pay. That was the only thing industry leading about this contract (and just barely). The work rule changes didn’t really address what FAs wanted. I hate the narrative that FAs are greedy and want more money because that really was never the case with this contract. We just don’t want to work 2 legs, sit for 3 hours in the airport, then work a red eye flight being on duty for up to 15 hours overnight, when AA FAs can only work two legs on overnight duty periods. We shouldn’t be made to sit for up to 4 hours in an airport with no crew room unpaid (even longer with delays) when our colleagues at AA get paid a portion on longer sits. I know the pay is the flashiest and easiest thing for non FAs to understand, but so many FAs were extremely disappointed with this TA barely addressing our biggest complaints.
I personally put this blame on both the company and union—the company has the money and power to offer us a great contract. But the union hasn’t surveyed members in a couple of years. A large portion of the workforce was hired in the last 2-3 years and it’s been a while since a survey was sent out gauging priorities. Additionally, I didn’t love how they spun the narrative around this contract. They were drilling it into us that we needed ground pay, but when it wasn’t secured, they explained that it actually wouldn’t be ideal because it would lower hourly compensation. Or saying that if this TA isn’t passed, we might not even get a better second one, but now that it hasn’t, they say this is our time to stand up to management and get better. I think they should just let the contract and the numbers speak for themselves at this point because they keep putting their foot in their mouth.
Matt this is a very disappointing read. I’d have expected better from you. Maybe before speaking for an entire work group containing thousands of people, you should communicate with real united airlines flight attendants. The ones who get the brunt of that garbage they call a TA. Not the 35 year topped senior FA who likely voted yes. I don’t care how many people you claim to know and call friends. You’re just spouting pointless rubbish. With this TA, UA and AFA told the FA group the following… “These are your new work rules, and we’ll hold you accountable if you don’t follow them. However, we don’t have to follow the rules, and you have no right to question it”. UA wants 100% control over the FA group, but have as little accountability and liability as possible. This is so far away from being about money. UA treats it’s FA’s like machines, not human beings. They put their employees and passengers in unsafe working conditions by not allowing them to complete their safety checks before passenger boarding. FA’s are put in hotels in dangerous neighborhoods so the company can save money, and these are a few very tip of the iceberg issues. Please don’t speak about or on behalf of this work group. Just because you believe you have a clue what they’re going through, doesn’t mean you actually do.
Yes .
Senior FAs are often lazy and bullies. There are some exceptions. Senior FAs should get their pay CUT, not increased. Then redistribute their pay to those with less senority. Seniority should determine routes worked, not pay. An old FA is no better and often worse than a FA with 2 years experience. Sure, a pay raise after 1 and 2 years but mostly flat after that.
@derek … Anyway , the younger ones are more cute and therefore deserve more pay .
Appearance and fluffiness is a better indicator of deserved pay , than longevity .
On SQ there are smiles , and not grouches .
These are the flight attendants that you said lifted their skirts for your photos? Let’s add misogyny to your homophobic, xenophobic racist virtues.
It’s just juvenile attempts to get a rise out of people. Remember when you were 13 and you thought things were funny that adults don’t? Give him time.
That’s called Socialism.
Yep .
I’m truly disappointed, Matthew, that you can’t see this within the context of Scott Kirby’s labor relations that existed at AA and US and exist at UA.
UA offered its pilots far less that what those same pilots ended up getting when Delta settled with its pilots for twice as much as the value of the UA post-covid contract.
UA’s mechanics rejected their contract proposal which included significant degradation of job protections.
Scott Kirby has tried for years to latch onto being a part of a club that includes DL and yet has underpaid virtually all of its non-pilot and non-mgmt employees. UA simply would not and cannot generate profits on par w/ DL – which is Kirby’s goal – if he pays his people DL and industry comparable wages.
This won’t be a quick or cheap revote. and the work rule changes that UA forced into the contract and the FAs rejected cost money.
Tim, I don’t disagree that Kirby wants to underpay his employees if he can get away with it. I also don’t disagree that Delta is (at least for now, and maybe always) in another league when it comes to profits.
But I don’t see this as a huge blow to United. FAs want respect…I saw it coming a month ago. They’ve gone five years without a raise and feel like it’s their turn…and that’s understandable. It’s understandable that they want certain workplace protections that the contract does not provide or is vague about. They’ll get some, but not all in round two…both sides will compromise and walk away unhappy, but with a new deal. There were some exceptions this time around, but historically, unions always reject the first round.
There is simply no conceivable world in which FAs at United would be paid more than their counterparts at DL, AA, and AS. FAs know it…they just want something a little better. I’m working on putting together the specifics of what they want.
the “blow” is that UA is doing this to every other non-pilot workgroup – and they did it to the pilots.
I haven’t suggested this will sink UA – but when the same theme is seen with every labor contract at UA, employees take notice and the great employee morale that Oscar built suddenly starts falling apart.
and given how much Kirby wants to be named in the same league w/ DL, adding hundreds of millions in costs for multiple workgroups will put UA right back where it was pre-covid – partway between AA and DL’s levels of profitability.
Kirby can’t have all of what he wants – DL levels of profitability and happy employees that will deliver decent customer service.
You are putting too much thought into this. Delta isn’t making any money flying, its all from their loyalty program… same with every other airline
and yet Delta figured out not only how to put all of those non-transportation pieces together better than any other US airline but also to keep its people well-compensated and not seeking unions other than what already exist.
and, relevant to this discussion, it is Delta that increased pay and set the standard for the rest of the industry including FAs.
and DL does use PBS for crew scheduling including for FAs and also doesn’t allow FAs to give away all of their time and still receive medical benefits.
UA knows full well why DL has a cost advantage even though it pays its people more.
Despite what some make, it is because DL succeeds at running its business as a business and not beholden to or constantly at war w/ union interests – either side of which damages any business.
UA should ask for an impasse to be declared and start hiring non union FAs
How would that work?
There is no strike. There is no disruption of service. What would these new flight attendants do, other than being superfluous?
I hope Derek doesn’t work in business… Sure FAs don’t take a huge amount of time to hire and train usually like 6 weeks, so UA could open up applications literally accept everyone (assuming they all pass the drug and background checks which they won’t but sure) then hire 30,000 flight attendants, then train them for 6 weeks in which 20-25% fail (so maybe hire 40,000. the current training centre has capacity for about ~5 classes of 100 at a time so quick maths tells me thats about 4,500 FAs a year they could train (with some generous rounding. UA is experience about 35-40% first year turnover in FAs because they hate reserve conditions so much so they lose 1,500 of those within their first year, so let me check my maths… oh yeah if they have an impasse and replace everyone they’ll just need 10 years of no flying! Great business decision Derek.
You left out some considerations, among which are that a lot of language skills will be required for United’s extensive international route structure. Outside of Spanish that’ll be tough. Then there’s that while United would undoubtedly fill up a couple of classes, the pool of quality applicants would start to get drained quickly as more and more are needed. And let’s not forget the lack of institutional knowledge. There won’t be a cadre of experienced pros to show the newcomers the ropes. Beyond that, the pool of applicants for a company that obviously detests its own employees will shrink further as word gets out of what the new job with even less protections is really like.
As a business owner I can attest that going to war with your people is pretty much never a good idea. Kirby is a soulless bean counter so he sees things differently, often missing the hidden price like The High Cost Of Cheap Labor.
That’s not the way it really works. United management wants nothing to do with any semblance of a work action. If you think the meltdown was bad a few years ago, it would make that look like a garden party even if a small number of crew participated CHAOS action. They don’t have enough crews now as it is.
Strategically targeted flights would cause major damage. The company knows this. Add to this IF other actions would take place such as sicknouts, an unwillingness to pick up trips from open has the potential to cause major havoc. Now if the flight attendants would have the balls to do this, that I don’t know.
It’s fantasy anyway since the government will not allow it. Imagine if they did these types of actions Thanksgiving week. Oh my….
Time to move airlines away from the provisions of the Railroad Labor Act.
Labor negotiators are extended over a protracted period of time in favor of the railroads and airlines. Also, the president has the authority to stop a strike from happening.
Why? Do you think having Sarah Nelson with her hand around the throat of the economy is a good idea?
You don’t understand how the Railway Labor Act works. It is a balance for both sides. While it is difficult for a union to strike, it is also equally difficult for the union to be locked out. That seems ridiculous now, but were it not for that provision, you can bet your bottom dollar that would have happened during COVID. Since airlines couldn’t lock out their union employees, they could only go through the time consuming process of laying them off by seniority and over time. Could they have been locked out, they would have been immediately.
That’s why the Payroll Protection Act was so important.
Another key part of the Railway Labor Act is possibly the most important. Once a company becomes union, it can never become non-union.
It can change unions, but union busters can’t happen.
Do you think labor should give up those things?
you are largely correct but there is one major provision of the RLA that has resulted in the elimination of tens of thousands of union jobs.
When an airline merges and involves a workgroup with union and non-union represented employees, at a certain percentage of employees being union, a vote is required for the combined workgroup to decide on representation.
that is exactly what happened during the DL/NW merger integration process which involved a half dozen combined workgroups merging and tens of thousands of union jobs were eliminated with the unionization status of DL basically unchanged by the merger.
That was a once in an industry lifetime occurrence and is not likely to happen again unless DL acquires a significant portion of the assets or merges w/ another US airline.
It isn’t impossible for unions to be eliminated but it takes a very rare combination of events.
and one of the sticking points of the UA FA contract proposal was the addition of preferential bidding. DL and many other airlines has PBS for its FAs and pilots. There are valid reasons why UA wanted it and equally valid reasons why UA FAs rejected it but not having PBS makes the workforce less efficient – which does cost UA money.
It isn’t such a minor cosmetic change for UA or the AFA to decide to budge on that issue.
It was a once
This will be Nelson’s last rodeo. I feel badly for those that have paid for bad advice. Best of luck to everyone.
I doubt we will be so fortunate.
I agree. To have her negotiating team’s t/a votes down twice is pretty, pretty bad.
There is clearly some kind of insurgency going on, but it may be even more radical than Nelson.
Somebody is giving the rank and file the idea they can do even better than Nelson has brought to them
Agreed.
Sara Nelson was not in the negotiation team of this contract. Nelson is the head of the ENTIRE AFA which represents multiple airlines. Internally, a lot more frustration is being directed towards elected United AFA management which were the ones who directly did the negotiations for UA FAs. You can dislike her all you want, but she plays much less of a role in this than you’d think. I don’t have a problem with her as a figurehead of the AFA organization as a whole as that does in fact involve a lot of lobbying and networking.
Last fall, the federal mediator broke off negotiations and basically told the union “Call me when you get serious.”
Negotiations resumed in the spring with everyone well aware that the most infitessimal chance the president would allow a strike was now gone.
In the meantime, UA has started enforcing contract provisions to the letter regarding sickouts and other actions that the union might use for CHAOS. (Create Havoc Around Our System. As if telling the passengers they were willing to create chaos was a good p.r. tactic.)
If push truly came to shove, the president can impose new contract provisions (or just keep the existing one in place) if it were in the national interest.
The company has offered a contract that’s worth a certain amount of money that it thinks will keep it competitive. It’s going to assume those costs however it can, but after all this time, it’s not likely to give more, so to get those “non-economic” benefits, the union is going to have to give up something else.
Off topic but hope you and your family will be safe with regards to the tsunami alert…
whining babies. literally fire them all. they should thank us for keeping their jobs during the pandemic through our tax money but all they do is whine and complain
Yes taking a 30% haircut for 12 years, losing their pensions, increased working hours imposed on them. You ungrateful bastards!! Be happy you have a job, you contemptuous serf!!
Lost their pensions?
Why do you lie? Not a single mediocrity lost their pensions.
Some took haircuts. But the unions routinely sabotage the companies profitability, extort more and more money, distort operations to benefit their oldest and laziest members, and when the company enters bankruptcy they dare most about their pensions!
The flees expect to bleed the dog forever , and then complain when it collapses…
Under Kirby United has consistently shown itself to be completely untrustworthy. I don’t blame the flight attendants a bit for rejecting a contract where they’re almost certain to get royally screwed. I wonder if Kirby, with his perpetual myopia, realizes the damage he’s doing to the product he’s trying to sell. A terrible look for Kirby’s Best Airline In History.
On a side note I find the union’s response to be awful. The published statement crows about rejecting the (terrible except for pay itself) contract when the union is the party that tried to sell the contract to its’ own members. Instead of owning their catastrophe the union points fingers. Perhaps the “strong message” is also that the union should do a decent job for once.
So what happens to the $560 million charge United to last quarter?? Does it get added to this quarters profits?? Are earnings restated?? That’s a lot of scharole..
Whichever politician takes on these whiny extortionists, and requires them to pay taxes on the free travel they and their families get at the public’s expense, will be my hero and will have my vote.
Sheetmetal Steve Ozempic at EWR says that those flight attendants are spoiled, pampered and ungrateful. “They will soon be left eating the leftover scraps” from the IBT’s feast at the technician’s negotiating table!