This is a fascinating peek inside United Airlines flight attendant union politics. Union members just rejected a new contract the union negotiated, that would give them their first raise in five years.
AFA-CWA says United flight attendants rejected the contract the union negotiated and recommended – telling them there was no better deal, this was not just a first offer – because of an executive who is leaving. Convenient. Senior Vice President of Inflight John Slater is retiring form the airline.
- This excuses AFA’s own accountability
- While telling crew that any reason to reject whatever contract they negotiate next is gone.
- And also excuses top management for everything union members are unhappy about even though the union has previously claimed the vast majority of its members continue to have unresolved issues at work.
— JonNYC (@xJonNYC) August 4, 2025
John Slater becomes the Girardian sacrifice for the airline and the union – the scapegoating mechanism where a community projects its violence onto a chosen victim, believing that sacrificing this individual will restore order and harmony.
Ultimately the union believes they already got as much economic value from United as they possibly could (and that includes quality of life / work rules). That’s probably correct, especially with a new administration even less likely than the last one to sign off on an airline strike. So now they’re left with shuffling around priorities in the contract to sell something new as better to the membership, but without much greater investment by the airline.
They’ll survey flight attendants, say they’ve aligned priorities better with what crew want, and do some math that says the new contract gives them more. But they’re also saying Slater was really the reason they were unhappy, so everyone can move forward.
Nah, they deserve a better deal. Keep fighting the good fight. Ignore this noise.
Slater had 42 years with the company. Hard to say this retirement wasn’t already planned.
Two of those FAs are enormous. Wider than a drink cart, so they’re not going to be able to make it down the aisle w/o bumping into all the aisle seat passengers. UA continues to fly with these morbidly obese FAs, in stark contrast to the Middle Eastern and Asian carriers who realize these folks spend 99.9% of their careers as waitresses and the front line to the customer of what the brand represents.
Scott Kirby prefers to blame anyone but himself for anything that goes wrong at United so I’m sadly not surprised that Nelson’s crappy management at the union does the same.
Flight attendants should wake up to the reality of a faltering job market (which has been sub optimal for years but the bogus numbers just hide it), softer demand from consumers for travel, and no shortage of young people that want their jobs.
They should remember that for example from 2001 to 2012 American Airlines did not hire one new flight attendant, other than maybe a few South American based. If there’s a crash in air travel the younger flight attendants are going to be back working at WalMart.
@1990 — this ties in nicely to the 80s Guy conversation from yesterday: “Now, the first order of business is to blame everything on the guy before me…Professor?”
@George Romey — Wait, so is the ‘economy’ strong, or not?
Because, I thought your ‘guy’ was willing to literally fire the ‘experts,’ and ‘fudge’ the numbers so that He’s always ‘good,’ and the other ‘team,’ always bad, objective reality be damned.
As to labor, generally, everyone, young and old, wants not just a ‘living’ wage, but a ‘thriving’ wage, which should be not only possible, but ‘standard’ in our country (referring to the USA).
Finally, please ‘pick a lane,’ are you in-favor of immigration or against it, now? It just seems like you enjoy complaining about workers and anyone you deem ‘lesser than’…
@L737 — The irony is many of our ‘problems’ today can be literally sourced to the start of ‘trickle-down’ economics in the 80s, and hype-men, like that fictional character in Futurama. It was the beginning of the slow-death of what was one of the greatest creations on Earth: the American middle class.
If the union negotitors listened to the members of their concerns, that would have been forefront in the negotiation. The members rejected because of a variety of work rules not fixed and or added by the company. Historically FA negotiations don’t do well, but failure by 71% is bad.
Economic problems started well before the trickle down economics 80s. The oil embargos were a major part as was stagflation. The price and wage controls did not work. The economy was in shambles in the 1970s and I remember it well.
71% is not overwhelming to me. If it was that bad it would have been in the 90 percentile. Don’t expect a quick resolution here. Probably some changes on the AFA negotiating committee. Then you have to get them up to speed with where they were position wise. Might even have to survey the membership again. Bottom line is the F/A’s lose on the time value of money. No matter what they say it’s always about the coin. The economics of this deal have been set. There will be some movement of the furniture and by that time the F/A’s will be worn out and basically agree to the deal they rejected in the first place.
@Coffee Please — Nah, they’re working on it; it doesn’t have to take long, but either way, worth it. You also forget that the pay increase is retroactive, so what they’re fighting for will cover them for the ‘time value of money,’ unless you’re making a more general argument that if they ‘invested,’ etc., but that’s attenuated, because not everyone is gonna use that increased income the same way. Bottom line is that this is all part of the process. If management doesn’t tango, then probably strike-y strike.
coffee is right. The AFA tried to play different groups within the UA FA ranks against each other and, to the AFA’s surprise, the majority of FAs aren’t willing to sell their future job protections for the benefit of a minority of high seniority FAs.
UA also really wants preferential bidding and very likely is penalizing the overall agreement for the unwillingness of the AFA to adopt PBS.
there will be some backside covering but ultimately UA FAs will pay a price for being divided and the AFA’s inability to balance competing interests.
@1990.
Is it 100% retro or a portion of? Very few labor groups get 100%.
@1990
One more thing. I highly doubt the company and AFA are even talking right now.
@Coffee Please — I’m not sure, and it’s probably being re-negotiated now anyway. By the way, I’m not involved, though, I generally support organized labor, as greater protections and advocacy for workers tends to benefit the society at-large, and, more specifically, here, I hope the FAs get a better deal, because ultimately, I think well-supported crews make for better passenger experiences, too. I’ve been consistently pro-worker and pro-consumer on here, and nothing has changed my mind otherwise so far.
@Coffee Please — As to mere ‘talking,’ I’m reminded of the line from the Tom Hanks film Bridge of Spies, where he asks the guy, “Aren’t you worried?” And he responds, “Would it help?”
@1990 I’m for LEGAL immigration with requirements and restrictions. Just like what my grandparents were willing to do so that one day their grandson could sit in a fancy airport lounge making six figures while belting out a response to someone living in la la land.
I never said the economy is “strong.” The jobs numbers have been total bullsh%t for decades now, including Trump One and Biden. Not to mention what core inflation, credit card debt, student loan debt, outrageous car loan payments and Buy Now/Pay Later schemes are doing on the middle and lower middle class. As far as a living wage, flight attendants aren’t exactly making minimum wage. I’m all for 1970s type fares in part if it gives flight attendants higher pay. But you all want Frontier like fares. And so do the politicians. Politicians complain about “high air fares” in the manner cats lick themselves.
There’s economic reality. I realize that my job will soon be taken over by AI. There are others like me that live in la la land that claim “no my six figure IT job will never be done by AI” even as big tech is firing workers by the hundreds of thousands in favor of AI. The flight attendants need to live in the world that is, not the world they like to be in.
Just finished a flight on UA. Had the chance to chat with a 25 year employee who voted “yes.”
1. She was amazing. One of the best of United.
2. The story is far more nuanced that what we are reading (surprise). Truth is both sides are at fault.
3. Sounds like the union may be struggling with balancing the the wants of the pre-COVID FAs with the post-COVID FAs.
I can imaging it’s hard when reservists think they are entitled to everything people with 20 years of experience get.
@ coffee
Speak on things you know. 71% is more than Southwest and Alaska when it comes to a no vote!
@Parker
It’s the “me now” generation. That 25 year F/A has been through a lot. If there is an event down the road for these young airlines folks where the company comes at them for furloughs, pay cuts, benefit reductions. They won’t know what hit them.
@Parker — I flew with UA on Sunday, and was speaking with one of the newer FAs. You may have noticed some are wearing red lanyards with ‘Contract Now!’ It certainly is nuanced, and most do want a resolution as soon as possible, but it also needs to be on the right terms. Like, yes, there can be ‘peace’ if people merely stop fighting, but a ceasefire doesn’t always mean justice or a lasting peace.
Fight fight fight till you bring this horrible company its almost crime against humanity CEO and his team to their knees. They deserve nothing until y’all get what you want.
BA,
and you do realize that UA has a history of militant and hostile labor relations where some employees, including the pilots, were ready to burn the place down if they didn’t get what they wanted.
Coffee,
younger workers are very right not to have their work rules sold in order to benefit older workers.
1990,
contract NOW doesn’t seem terribly nuanced. The frustration is building and UA needs to do what it can to get the issue settled or face declines in their customer service.
@Tim Dunn — See, I read it differently. I saw the emphasis as ‘CONTRACT now’… bah!
As this story post relates to our beloved Delta, at least, for now, it seems Ed and the board has done a better job of maintaining at least the semblance of the ‘social contract’ with its workers by continuing to competitively profit-share with them.
Whereas, companies that merely to ‘milk’ their workers and consumers dry, just so they can obtain and keep excessive profits, are going to face trouble. Folks do have breaking-points. Everyone *needs* a ‘living’ wage, and *wants* a ‘thriving’ wage. It’s possible here, so long as excessive greed doesn’t ‘kill the golden goose.’ I hope UA’s FAs get a better contract soon.
@George Romey — Almost missed your reply. Thank you for your patience, and for addressing the earlier points. Unless we’re Native Americans, we’re all immigrants or the offspring of immigrants (in the USA) and in many countries around the world.
No one is reasonably in-favor of law-breaking (keep in mind, driving over the speed limit is also ‘breaking the law,’ yet we rarely call those who speed ‘illegals,’ and maybe we should, to be fair); however, as it relates to our current system, it’s clearly broken, and in desperate need of reform.
Instead of actually addressing those issues, like the bi-partisan plan in 2024 (and others before it like Rubio’s plan in 2013), creating a logical path to citizenship… nope, we’re just doubling-down on gestapo tactics, blaming the ‘brown’ folks, rounding-up and renditioning ‘productive people,’ who, arguably, are not much different than your or my ancestors, who came here seeking a better life for themselves and us, often engaging in the ‘lesser’ yet still essential roles of our society, like picking and preparing our food, gardening our lawns, and washing our cars, etc.
Most folks are not in-favor of what has happened since January 2025. I don’t think the polls or the voters will be kind moving forward either. A vocal minority will continue to cheer this on. But it’s not a winning strategy to scapegoate the random Honduran woman selling bubble gum on the Subway…